#^>^^ 








'^^^fi^^^' 



^ULO^ 



ci, m^ 



JLIBRARY OF CONGRESS. # 

# ^ ± # 

J|hHp.\Sil^BrigW |o \ 

f UNITED STATES OP AMERICA.! 



\ 



c doX^U^^-A.^X ,YTLA>v>^lrr..\ 



THE 



PHILOSOPHY 



CHRISTIAN PERFECTION: 



A PSYCHOLOGICAL STATEMENT OF SOME OF THE PRIN- 
CIPLES OF CHRISTIANITY ON WHICH 

THIS DOCTRINE RESTS: ....^—' — 



.-:^ OF co>,^ 

f0^ CQ PYrclGfi 1 V"\ 



TOGETHER WITH V .. / T/ ^ 

\ A Ho/ Y ; 



▲ PRACTICAL EXAMINATION OF. THE PECULIAR VIEWS OF SEVERAL 
RECENT WRITERS ON THIS SUBJECT. 



PHILADELPHIA : 
SORIN AND BALL. 

1848. 






Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1847, by 
SORIN & BALL, 
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Eastern District of Penn- 
sylvania. 



STEREOTYPED BY L. JOHNSON AND CO.f 

PHILADELPHIA. 

PRINTED BY KING AND BAIRD. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

Page 
Introductory ..-.----7 



CHAPTER n. 

An Inquiry into the Original Constitution of Man — The 
Psychological Elements necessary to constitute him a 
proper subject of a Moral Government — Nature and 
Extent of his Original Perfection - - - - 13 



CHAPTER III. 

An Inquiry into the consequences of the First Transgres- 
sion : — First, as affecting the Original Pair — Secondly, 
as affecting their Posterity — The Nature and Extent of 
Human Depravity -28 

CHAPTER IV. 

An Inquiry into the Nature and Extent of the Divine Pro- 
vision for Man's Recovery from the Moral Effects of 
the Fall — The Nature of Christian Perfection psycholo- 
gically stated — This Doctrine held by the Christian 
Church, in all Ages, and in all its Branches — Three 

classes of Writers on this subject - - - - 38 

ill 



IV CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER V. 

Page 

A remark on the true Value of Psychological Investiga- 
tions, as connected with Questions of Theology — The 
Old Presbyterian Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctifica- 
tion of Man's Moral Nature is not attainable in this 
Life, compared with the Principles laid down in the 
foregoing Sections - - - - - - -61 

CHAPTER VL 

The Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's 
Nature is attainable in this Life, though never at- 
tained, compared with the Principles of the former 
Sections of this Book — Views of some of the New Eng- 
land Divines examined ------ 69 

CHAPTER Vn. 

The Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's 
Nature is practically attainable in this Life, partially 
considered — The Wesleyan Theory : — First, Wesley's 
Views apparently discordant — Second, Dr. Peck's new 
" Standard of Duty" and " of Obedience" under the 
Gospel Dispensation, examined — Third, The discrepan- 
cies of Wesley's System explained, and the View^s of 
several modern Wesleyan Writers stated - - - 76 

CHAPTER VIH. 

The Oberlin System of Christian Perfection compared 
with the Principles of the former Sections of this Book 
— Christian Perfection considered particularly : — First, 
with reference to fallen Man's "weak powers" — Second, 
as "permanent" or "perpetual" — Third, in its connec- 
tion with the Doctrine of" Natural Ability" - - 110 



CONTENTS. V 

CHAPTER IX. 

Page 

The Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's 
Nature is practically attainable in this Life, still fur- 
ther considered — Some of the Peculiar Views of Dr. 
Upham's Interior or Hidden Life examined : — Firsts The 
distinction between Infirmities and Sins — Second, The 
Nature of the Temptations of the Sanctified Christian 
— Third, The Nature of the Temptations of our Saviour. 117 

Conclusion .-.-.--. 156 



THE PHILOSOPHY 



CHRISTIAN PEHFECTIOK 



CHAPTER I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

If there is, among the legitimate objects of human 
research, a single question more interesting than all 
others, it is — What is the standard of moral perfection 
personally attainable by man? This inquiry has 
elicited some interest, in all ages, among those who 
have enjoyed the light of revelation ; and as this light 
has increased in brightness, men have prosecuted 
their researches with greater zeal, though not per- 
haps with the success which might have been ex- 
pected. We are told of some who << love darkness 
rather than light." It could scarcely be expected of 
such that they should profit by the light which has 
been given. Others have doubtless felt the force of 
prejudice and prepossession to a degree which may 



8 PHILOSOPHY OF 

have darkened their understandings, and disqualified 
them for .the successful investigation of truth. And, 
indeed, who can claim an entire exemption from this 
common weakness of humanity ? 

It should be remarked, also, that the highest at- 
tainments in religious experience may often have 
been made by men incapable of presenting, in pre- 
cise and intelligible language, either the nature of 
the grace attained, or the process of its attainment. 
They may never have acquired habfts of careful re- 
flection, or mental analysis; or may not have had 
the use of language to give the results of their expe- 
rience with that precision w^hich philosophy demands. 
Any misrepresentation, on the part of such, would 
naturally prove doubly injurious ; because so many 
confound experience and theory, and suppose that 
whatever one has experienced he can explain. If 
this were true, every one would be a metaphysician, 
since every man has experience of an infinite variety 
of mental phenomena. Yet how few, in the history 
of the human race, have possessed the power to turn 
their observation inward, and to give to the world an 
accurate analysis of their mental experience ! — These 
attainments have also been made by the learned. 
But even here, too, we find a grand source of fallacy 
and error. Most of those w^ho have written out their 
experience have used the technical language of their 
several sects, so that this experience often appears 
discrepant, and sometimes contradictory ; and even 
when they have employed the language of Scripture, 
if we refer to the comments of sectarian writers, we 



CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 9 

find ourselves equally unable to ascertain the mean- 
ing of the terms they have chosen to use. So im- 
portant a part of the experience of the Christian 
ought, doubtless, to find an adequate expression 
in the well-defined terms of psychological science. 
Though this may seem of no consequence to the 
uneducated practical Christian, yet to the philoso- 
phic theologian, it cannot but appear a matter of 
vast moment ; and, on this account, that psycholo- 
gical system should be considered vitally defective, 
which does not embrace this experience. 

Without pausing to set forth fully the advantages 
of having the Christian experience presented to the 
comprehension of all in definite and philosophic lan- 
guage, we may remark, that, in the absence of this, 
it seems obvious, that just so far as men are inexpe- 
rienced, they neither know what to set definitely 
before themselves as the object of their faith, nor 
what to expect as the fruits, should such object be 
attained. This principle has often been distinctly 
recognised even by those who have written on this 
very subject. One recent writer says: — '< That we 
may not act at random, or fight as those who beat 
the air, it will be necessary, if possible, to have de- 
finite views of that perfection at which we are to 
aim."* Another speaks of it as a most important 
practical inquiry, — ^<What degree of holiness may 
we ourselves expect from Christ when we exercise 



* The Scripture Doctrine of Christian Perfection, by Dr. Peck, 
Lect. ii. 



10 PHILOSOPHY OF 

faith in him ?"* Yet when the one tells us that per- 
fection <' implies simply loving God with all the 
heart ;'^'^ and the other, <'that he looks lo the very 
God of peace to sanctify him wholly^ and preserve 
his whole spirit^ and soul^ and body^ blameless unto 
the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,^'^ though they 
place before the mind an attainment possessing high 
moral attractions, there is an indefiniteness in the 
view ; and this is even increased by their own com- 
ments, as the one tells us that this perfection does 
" not imply a perfect fulfilment of the Adamic law," 
and intimates that <' some allowance is made" 
for human infirmities ; and the other, that << he is 
perfect in holiness, whose love at each successive 
moment corresponds with the extent of his powers." 
We wish, in the one case, to know precisely from 
what requirements of the Adamic law we are re- 
leased, and in what sense we are released from 
them ; and, in the other, to have some unambiguous 
statement as to what is supposed to be the actual 
<< extent of our [present] powers," considered either 
absolutely, or at least relatively to the powers origi- 
nally granted to man. When such points as these 
have been settled, so that we can clearly appre- 
hend them, then, and then only, even if with these 
writers w^e believe holiness attainable in this life, do 
we know what to look for in our experience as the 
fruits of this grace. 



* Scripture Doctrine of Christian Perfection, by Rev. Asa Ma- 
han, Concl. p. 232. 



CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 11 

In the treatise upon which we now enter, we pro- 
pose to interrogate our psychology ; that we may 
see whether science, as the handmaid of revelation, 
can be made to aid in giving us any clearer views 
of the moral constitution of man, or any more de- 
finite ideas of the moral perfections made attainable 
by him. Instead of propounding any new theory of 
Christian perfection, our object will be, in the first 
few chapters, to discuss some general principles, 
and, so far as we are able, to render intelligible to 
all acquainted with the modern terms of metaphy- 
sical science, the great system of Bible truth, as we 
suppose it to be understood and interpreted by evan- 
gelical Christian writers generally ; and then, by the 
aid of the light we may thus obtain, to see how far 
this will tend to reconcile the conflicting views of 
those who have, from time to time, engaged in the 
discussion of the subject now immediately before us. 
The disuse, therefore, of all technical language, even 
though it may be the language of Scripture, so far 
as it has been employed in different senses, will not 
be deemed affectation. It will, indeed, be readily 
seen, that the employment of such language would 
entirely countervail the object we have in view ; 
which is not to support, nor indeed to overturn, any 
existing theory ; but rather to see to what extent 
the various theories may be reconciled with each 
other. 

Such being our purpose, we deem it important to 
remark, first^ that both as to the topics we shall 
introduce, (though they may be somewhat various,) 



12 PHILOSOPHY OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 

and the extent to which we shall discuss them, we 
shall have sole reference to the elucidation of our 
views of the single subject of Christian perfection ; 
so that he who would even understand what these 
views are, must make up his mind to read the whole 
of this little volume, or he will not find it worth his 
while to proceed farther in its perusal ; — and, second^ 
that in the discussion of the subject before us, we 
shall not unfrequently make quotations and refer- 
ences, rather to show how generally certain doc- 
trines have been held, than as authority for holding 
them ourselves. 



man's original constitution. 13 



CHAPTER II. 

An Inquiry into the Original Constitution of Man — The 
Psychological Elements necessary to constitute him a pro- 
per subject of a Moral Government — Nature and Extent of 
his Original Perfection. 

One of the first points connected with our subject^ 
in which we find a general agreement among evan- 
gelical Christians, is — that man, as he came ori- 
ginally FROM THE HAND OF HIS MaKER, WAS A 
BEING OF DISTINGUISHED EXCELLENCE AND PERFEC- 
TION. This is inferred from the fact of his being 
represented as the masterpiece of God's earthly crea- 
tion ; from his being made in the <« image" and 
<< likeness" of God, and from the testimony of in- 
spiration, that " God made man upright." But in 
what his perfection — in what this ''image of God" 
in which he was created — consisted, there seems to 
be little agreement. On this subject, what do we 
learn from the history of the case — from the clear, 
unequivocal testimony of Scripture ? 

Without attempting, at this point, any thing like a 
full detail of the peculiarities of man's original con- 
stitution, we think the four following positions so ob- 
vious as not to admit of controversy : — 

(1.) That he was imperfect in knowledge. — " The 
woman, being deceived, was in the transgression." 

2 



14 man's original constitution. 

— 2 Tim. ii, 14. If deceived, her knowledge must 
have been imperfect. 

(2.) He was endowed with physical appetites. — 
These were doubtless intended as sources of enjoy- 
ment, as well as for other important purposes. The 
appetite for food was directly appealed to in the 
fatal temptation which led to his ruin. 

(3.) He was endowed with propensities and affec- 
tions not in their nature unlike those which now be- 
long to the human mind. The principle of curiosity, 
or the desire to know, was but too successfully ad- 
dressed by Satan, when he said to the woman : — 
" In the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be 
opened ; and ye shall be as gods, knowing good 
from evil ;" and Adam himself seems to have been 
seduced to sin by his affection for his companion. 

(4.) This suggests the other element in his consti- 
tution, to which we wdsh to refer ; which is, that he 
was endowed with a susceptibility of being addressed 
by invisible malignant spirits. We believe ''the ser- 
pent" is universally supposed to have been only the 
mediate agent of Satan in working out the ruin of 
our race. 

Whether God had in reserve for our first parents, 
on condition of their fidelity, any better inheritance, 
or more eligible situation, than that in which we 
here find them placed, it has not pleased him to in- 
form us. The fatal result, however, but too well 
proved that the state in which they were placed was 
one of danger — of moral trial and conflict. The 
elements of their constitution, which we have no- 



THE ORIGINAL TEMPTATION. 15 

ticed, seem designed to make them, what it was 
doubtless intended they should be, the most fit sub- 
jects of a moral government, capable of the exercise 
of the highest moral virtues, not less than of the en- 
joyment of the highest happiness. To furnish the 
opportunity for the exercise of these virtues, and to 
develope and strengthen their moral powers, it ap- 
pears, beyond all doubt, that the state in which they 
were placed was one of warfare^ as truly as is that 
of the Christian — a scene of attack and resistance. 
We are among those who believe the account given 
of the fall of man to be literal ; others have supposed 
it an allegory. But whether literal or figurative, it 
doubtless gives us a true representation of the nature 
of the temptations to which he was exposed; we 
shall therefore use it in illustration of the view we 
have taken. 

It is a most obvious truth, that as our first parents 
held their inheritance only on condition of obedience, 
the temptation by which this inheritance was lost, or 
any temptation by which it could have been endan- 
gered, was of a nature to call for resistance on their 
part. This is a sort of axiom with theological 
writers ; and is referred to here, only because of the 
ambiguity which attaches to the English word tempt- 
ation. In one sense of the term, we are told that 
God tempted Abraham. Gen. xxii, 1. But they 
were tempted as God never tempts any man. Now, 
a little reflection will show, that this peculiar element 
in the case — the demand for resistance — furnishes us 
with a clue to the precise nature of the temptations 



16 NATURE OF THE 

which were consistent with the state of man's origi- 
nal purity. For this purpose, we proceed, then, to 
inquire, where is the point, in the experience which 
accompanies the presentation of an object of tempta- 
tion, at which the power of resistance is called for, 
or at which it can, from the nature of the case, begin 
to be exercised ? 

The case before us, of our first parents and the 
forbidden fruit, admits the following hypotheses as 
psychologically possible : — 

(1.) That they might look on the forbidden tree, 
merely as an indifferent object, with no feeling of 
interest in regard to it. (2.) That there might be 
combined with this external perception, the idea that 
its fruit was interdicted, and thus, that they were not 
at liberty to use it. (3.) That they might have the 
intellectual perception, that it was adapted to meet 
some of the wants of other beings, though interdicted 
to them. (4.) That they might even have a clear 
and distinct perception of the object, not only as 
adapted to the wants of others, but as adapted, in 
common with the other fruits of the garden, to please 
their own eye, or palate, or to satisfy any other want. 
(5.) That there might be superadded to this, the 
thought of possible transgression, with all its fatal 
consequences, so far as they knew or could compre- 
hend them. — These are perhaps all the merely intel- 
lectual perceptions the case would admit of; and in 
neither of these can there be found any occasion for 
resistance ; for the simple reason that there was no- 
thing to resist. All these perceptions, it was doubt- 



ORIGINAL TEMPTATION. 17 

less intended by his Maker, that man should have. 
Even in the last supposed case, the most that could 
be called for, would be to put himself in an attitude 
of defence ; but a state of defence does not necessa- 
rily imply a state of actual contest — the idea of pos- 
sible attack does not imply actual resistance. In- 
deed, this state of defence implies security rather 
than danger. Resistance^ then, with only these intel- 
lectual perceptions, there could not be. 

Now, with reference to finding the first occasion 
for resistance, let us trace this experience into the 
region of the sensibilities, — Suppose that Eve, as she 
walks through the garden, has her attention attracted 
by the forbidden tree ; and, perceiving '< that it was 
pleasant to the eyes," pauses to admire the beauty 
of its foliage and of the rich fruit which hangs from 
its boughs, till she is diverted by the melody pro- 
ceeding from some neighboring bower, or by the 
approach of her companion in bliss, or of some hea- 
venly visitant. Here the forbidden tree has been 
contemplated with emotions of beauty, and yet they 
have furnished no occasion for resistance. There was 
nothing as yet to resist ; since, undoubtedly, it was 
among the most beautiful trees of the garden, and 
was one of the works of God which she had not been 
prohibited from looking upon, but only from tasting. 
— Suppose again, that her attention is attracted by 
the beauties of this tree, as she is admiring all the 
works of its Creator, and that she tarries beneath its 
shade till hunger begins to steal upon her; when her 
mind turns to the clusters of which she has often 

2* 



18 NATURE OF THE 

eaten, and she seeks her sole companion, and with 
him sits down to the rich provision afforded by the 
other trees of the garden. << The woman saw that 
the tree was good for food." We may even sup- 
pose, then, in this case, that the forbidden fruit is 
the immediate occasion of thus exciting the appetite ; 
and yet there is furnished no occasion for resistance, 
since the appetite here seeks its gratification only in 
allowable objects. The most that, from the nature 
of the case, could be even here suggested, would be 
the idea oi possible danger ; in which case, her pure 
nature might have shrunk from the farther contem- 
plation of the tempting object, or have put itself into 
an attitude of repellency or defence. And even this 
supposed idea of possible danger must have had its 
origin solely in the original admonition, and not in 
her experience, unless she had already received some 
other evidence than we have as yet supposed of the 
seducing influence of the forbidden tree. 

But suppose again, that she has had such expe- 
rience of its seducing power ; and, as the conse- 
quence of this, that the beauty of the forbidden tree 
has become abhorrent to her moral sensibilities, so 
that she looks upon its attractions only with loathing. 
Here, again, there is no occasion for resistance ; all 
she has to do is to yield to the feelings of repulsion 
which she instinctively has. 

In tracing this chain, we must, then, somewhere 
have omitted a link. We have as yet found no de- 
mand for resistance ; consequently, no temptation — 
at least, no such temptation as could naturally lead 



ORIGINAL TEMPTATION. 19 

to actual transgression. We have not even seen any- 
natural origin of such a sense of danger, as could 
produce the abhorrence and loathing we have in this 
last case supposed. Where, then, shall we find the 
element in question ? It is doubtless to be found, 
(in such a temptation as we are considering,) in the 
conscious tendency of the appetite to seek its gratifica- 
tion in the forbidden object. Here alone can be found 
the origin of any strong sense of danger. This alone 
can suggest strongly to the moral sense the seducing 
tendency and power of the object ; and thus, this 
alone can explain the actual transgression in view of 
the tempting object, and alone could call out those 
feelings of abhorrence with which a pure mind should 
shrink back from its contemplation. — The appetite 
being but a modification of desire^ the same ele- 
ment may be found in any temptation to evil ; and 
its general designation would be — a conscious ten- 
dency of some of the desires to seek gratification in a 
forbidden object. 

In support of this conclusion, were it necessary, 
we might quote the definitions given of temptation 
by many of the most discriminating writers. — ''A, 
temptation," says the learned Dr. Ullmann, of the 
University of Heidleberg, " consists not barely in the 
ear's hearing evil words, such as are designed to 
encourage immorality and sin, but always in the 
mind's receiving certain ideas, so as to feel, in con- 
nection with them, some excitement of desire. This 
must be the case, even if we choose to adopt the no- 
tion of a tempting agency working from without, of 



20 TEMPTATION DEFINED. 

whatever nature the agency may be. But neither in 
that thought of evil, such a thought being also in the 
mind of God ; nor in that excitement of desire, such 
an excitement being inseparable from human nature, 
there being without it no possibility either of moral 
combat or victory ; in neither, I say, is there any sin 
at aD, so long as the power of choice triumphs 
purely and perfectly over both.""^ 

In a note of comment on these views of Dr. UU- 
mann, Professor Edwards, of the Theological Seminary 
at Andover, says : — '<> To say that a holy being pos- 
sesses the susceptibilities which, being excited to a 
certain degree, are the inward or subjective motives 
that occasion the change from holiness to sin, is only 
to say that this holy being is a moral being. To say 
that all excitement of these susceptibilities is itself 
sin, is to say that there is no difference between 
voluntary and involuntary desires, between the cha- 
racter and the constitution of man ; it is to say that 
sin is unavoidable — that it is to be charged upon the 
Deity as the only voluntary cause. To admit, how- 
ever, that the excitement of these susceptibihties is 
not in itself a sin, and, unless an undue excitement 
of them be indulged by the will^ leaves the being as 
holy as ever, is merely to admit that there is such a 
thing possible as the temptation of a being who re- 
mains sinless. The admission is essential to the 
idea of a moral agent." 

<< What is temptation ?'' inquires a discriminating 

* German Selections, by Edwards and Park, p. 435. 



21 

writer in a foreign journal, treating of general sub- 
jects. And the answer is, — '^ It is the irritation of 
the soul, produced by the presence of an object de- 
sired, but forbidden. Were it not desired, there 
would be no temptation."* 

Other views of this general subject will be pre- 
sented in a future chapter. At this point, we de- 
spair of being able, by the multipUcation of words, 
to make the conclusion at which we have arrived by 
the simple view we have taken any more obvious. 
Restrict the temptation of our first parents to any 
other state of mind than that recognised in the quo- 
tations just made, and the occasion for resistance 
cannot be found ; and without this, we hesitate not 
to say, the story of their apostasy is an absurdity. 
Thus, from what is clearly revealed on this subject, 
we now feel safe in making these further and obvious 
inferences : — 

First. That man, in his best estate, was exposed 
to temptation, in the sense of solicitation to sin ; and 
that such temptation could be presented by Satan 
in disguise — perhaps even as << an angel of light.'' 
2 Cor. xi, 14. 

Second. That he had appetites, propensities, and 
affections, the same in kind that we have ; and that 
these naturally sought and innocently found their 
gratification in objects which God had provided for 
the purpose. 

Third. That these natural sensibilities were sus- 



• Foreign Quarterly Review, April, 1845, Art. ix. 



22 man's original perfection 

ceptible of being addressed and excited, in view 
even of forbidden and unlawful objects ; and that 
this excitement might innocently amount even to a 
conscious tendency to seek their gratification in such 
forbidden objects. Such a tendency we have seen 
to be the peculiar element which alone can give 
temptation its effect, and which alone can call forth 
the power of moral resistance. 

Fourth. That the power which man originally 
possessed over the temptations to which his nature 
and situation exposed him, lay not, therefore, in any 
ability to prevent their action upon the sensibilities ; 
but must have consisted solely in the ability to sup- 
press the tendency to evil as soon as felt, and to 
withhold the assent of the will from the indulgence 
to which he was solicited. — An additional power, 
however, might doubtless have been acquired by 
experience, of avoiding circumstances of temptation 
in certain cases. 

Fifth. Another more general inference we deduce 
from all that we have established is — that the perfec- 
tion of our first parents was essentially a moral per- 
fection. We use this term moral in contradistinction 
to both physical and mental. The mere existence of 
physical appetites is by some considered of itself an 
imperfection ; and certainly, had man been a purely 
spiritual being, he would not have had them. But 
the first pair, not less than their offspring, had phy- 
sical bodies and physical appetites ; and these they 
had from the beginning. Every herb bearing seed, and 
every tree bearing fruit, except only the tree of the 



A MORAL PERFECTION. 23 

knowledge of good and evil, was given them for food. 
They were destined to eat and to drink ; and these, 
therefore, could have been no unworthy employments. 
In the same sentence in which it is said, " God cre- 
ated man in his own image," it is also said — " male 
and female created he them ;" and they were com- 
manded to << be fruitful and multiply, and replenish 
the earth, and subdue it." Such was man as he 
came 'perfect from the hand of his Maker — a physical 
as well as a spiritual and moral being. As man, his 
very perfection consisted in the possession of a phy- 
sical nature, and in the existence of all the peculiar 
mental characteristics consequent on such a consti- 
tution. 

What we may call the essential perfection of our 
first parents in paradise could not, however, have 
been, in any important sense, a physical perfection. 
We cannot for a moment suppose that there is any 
merely material, physical sense in which they could 
be said to be created in the ''likeness" and ''image" 
of God. It would, however, be aside from our pur- 
pose, to attempt to ascertain with precision the limits 
of their physical powers. Limits these powers must 
have had, even in Adam, who was produced in a 
state of maturity directly by the power of his Creator, 
unless their possessor had been invested with omni- 
potence. We are not aware that anybody supposes 
this ; and hence, instead of attaching to Adam any 
undefined or illimitable degree of physical excellence, 
we cannot but conclude that all his physical powers 
were limited, and at least in this sense imperfect. 



24 

That he was indeed exempt from physical suffering, 
pain and death, is evident ; but that he was not ex- 
empt from them on the ground of his moral or essen- 
tial perfection, is equally evident. There seems to 
have been nothing in his situation, to render them 
necessary. Had there been, he doubtless might 
have been as essentially perfect with them as with- 
out them. It is, indeed, conceivable, that they might 
have developed moral virtues which could not other- 
wise have attained a full maturity. These points are 
so obvious as scarcely to need support or illustration ; 
and yet they may perhaps become more obvious to 
the minds of some, by a reference to our Saviour, 
who, though " holy, harmless, undefiled, and sepa- 
rate from sinners," yet was exposed to all the physi- 
cal ills that even fallen man is natural heir to. He 
was made «^ perfect through sufferings." 

Nor was the essential perfection of our first parents 
a mental perfection. Adam was created directly by 
God ; and of course received mental endowments 
exactly equal to the office he was to fill, and the du- 
ties he was to perform. He was to give names to all 
the objects of nature ; and was to be an example to 
all who should rise up around him, of the judicious 
exercise of the '<• dominion" which God intended to 
give him " over all the earth," and <' over every liv- 
ing thing that moveth upon the earth." That he 
should be furnished with mental capacities beyond 
what was intended for his sons, is, therefore, no more 
wonderful, than that God has, from time to time, in 
the history of the world, endowed particular men 



A MORAL PERFECTION. 25 

with extraordinary powers, for the accomplishment 
of his great purposes. We have no evidence that 
Eve, who was his equal in all the essential elements 
of perfection, had any very extraordinary mental 
endowments. The deception by which she was led 
to sin would rather indicate a want of great intel- 
lectual acuteness, and that even on a question of 
morals. 

But as great mental capabilities Jiave been consi- 
dered by some an essential element in human per- 
fection, we may well demand, what is the precise 
amount of mental power which is requisite to the 
perfection of the human character ? Adam even 
must have found limits somewhere in the exercise of 
his mental as well as of his physical powers. He 
was not omniscient. And his sons — were they to 
inherit from birth the possession and exercise of all 
the mental powers of their father ? If not, at what 
period in their advancement towards manhood, were 
they to put on " the image of God ?" — If this " image 
of God," as some seem to suppose, consisted in any 
full development of intellectual power — in " know- 
ledge," as that term is commonly understood, — then 
we are forced to one or the other of these absurd con- 
clusions : — Either that the race of Adam was to be 
multiplied by the production of sons and daughters 
brought forth in a state of mental maturity ; or else 
his offspring were to become morally perfect, only as 
they became mentally so, — by the lapse of time. 
But if, as we have concluded, the " likeness" and 
" image of God," in which our first parents were 

3 



26 

created, was irrespective of intellectual power — con- 
sisting only in '< righteousness and true holiness," 
and embracing only the <' knowledge" requisite to 
the correct perception of moral truth, — then all is 
plain. Their offspring might have been as essen- 
tially perfect from birth as was the father ; and we 
are permitted also to infer, that even if man had re- 
tained his original rectitude, the society of the world 
might, notwithstanding, still have presented a very 
considerable diversity of mental powers. This, to 
say the least, seems almost essential to the existence 
of human society, even in its highest conceivable 
state of perfection. 

Those, therefore, who elevate their conceptions of 
a perfect human nature so high as to divest it of 
human appetites and of human affections, and to free 
it from the liability of error in judging and acting, 
do it without any warrant from Scripture, or support 
from sound reason. So far from this is the truth, 
that a perfect human nature must possess them all. 
Perhaps it is not too much to say that without them, 
man could not be a proper subject of the moral go- 
vernment under which God has placed him. 

We can conceive of no other perfection than such 
a moral perfection as we have here defined, suited 
to a being of limited powers. And again, this view, 
to our mind, furnishes the only true basis for growth 
in human perfection. Adam's youngest son would 
have been as essentially perfect as his father ; and 
yet, with every development of mental powder, and 
with every acquisition of knowledge, he might, as 



A MORAL PERFECTION. 27 

did the infant Jesus, have grown '< in favor with 
God," as well as << with man." These seem to be 
the replies which psychological science gives to our 
interrogatories touching this matter. We are not 
aware that they conflict with the well-digested 
view^s of theological writers ; while in some par- 
ticulars they receive from this source substantial 
support.* 

* Dr. Bates, an eminent divine of the seventeenth century, 
while treating of " Spiritual Perfection," says : — " The per- 
fection of paradise was frail, for man in his best state was 
changing : from this root his ruin sprang." The reader may 
advantageously consult on this subject, Butler's Analogy ^ 
Part i. Chapters iv, v; Watson's Institutes^ Part ii, Chap- 
ters vi, xviii; Knapp's Christian Theology, Sections liii, liv, Iv, 
Lxxv ; and Storr and Flatt's Biblical Theology, Sec. liii. 



28 HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 



CHAPTER III. 

An Inquiry into the Consequences of the First Transgression : 
— Firsts as affecting the Original Pair — Secondly, as affect- 
ing their Posterity — The Nature and Extent of Human 
Depravity. 

The second point of general agreement among 
evangelical writers, to which we wish to call the 
attention of the reader, is — That by transgression 

MAN LOST MUCH OF HIS ORIGINAL EXCELLENCE. 

This is inferred from the uniform testimony of Scrip- 
ture ; and is fully sustained both by consciousness 
and universal observation. But what is the precise 
extent of his loss, is not so well agreed. On the one 
hand, the moral injury sustained by man has been 
called a total depravity ; on the other, he has been 
supposed still to retain almost every degree of moral 
perfection. Most of those who have opposed the doc- 
trine of total depravity, have been charged with mis- 
conceiving the meaning of the terms. Nor ought 
misconception to be a matter of much wonder, where 
the language employed is obviously ambiguous. 
Dr. Dwight, a strenuous advocate of the doctrine 
of total depravity, admits : — 1. That the human cha- 
racter is not depraved to the full extent of its powers. 
2. That there are certain characteristics of human 



HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 29 

nature, which, considered by themselves, are inno- 
cent. 3. That some of the natural human charac- 
teristics are amiable ; as natural affection, the sim- 
plicity and sweetness of childhood, the modesty of 
youth, compassion, generosity, social integrity ; to 
which may be added, friendship, patriotism, and the 
sense of honor.* And Dr. Chalmers says : — << Let 
the nature of man be a ruin, as it certainly is, it is 
obvious to the most common discernment, that it 
does not offer one unvaried and unalleviated mass of 
deformity. There are certain phases, and certain 
exhibitions of this nature, which are more lovely 
than others — certain traits of character, not due to 
the operation of Christianity at all, and yet calling 
forth our admiration and our tenderness — certain va- 
rieties of moral complexion, far more fair and more 
engaging than certain other varieties ; and to prove 
that the gospel may have had no share in the forma- 
tion of them, they, in fact, stood out to the respect 
and notice of the w^orld, before the gospel was ever 
heard of."t We shall be excused, then, in the dis- 
cussion of this part of our subject, from the employ- 
ment of any technical theological terms, the mean- 
ing of which has been or may be misconceived. We 
proceed, therefore, at once to inquire, what is the 
nature and extent of the loss which man sustained 
by the original transgression ? 



* Theology Explained and Defended, ^c, Sermon xxxi. 
•\ First Discourse on the Application of Christianity to the Com' 
mercial and Ordinary Affairs of Life, 

3* 



30 .'HUMAN DEPRAVITY, 

Had man, by his original constitution, been iso- 
lated, or entirely protected from Satanic influence ; 
and had his transgression first exposed him to the 
machinations of the foe of God and man, this of itself 
would have been a degradation — ?ifall indeed. But 
such, as we have seen, was not his condition ; since, 
before sin w^as known, Satan successfully plotted 
the ruin of the first pair, and executed his infernal 
scheme, by entering the garden and making his sug- 
gestions of evil to the woman, in disguise. The 
moral injury sustained by the first transgression con- 
sisted not, then, in the susceptibility of being ap- 
proached by invisible malignant spirits. Again, it 
is entirely conceivable, that by the transgression of 
God's law, on the part of man, there might have been 
implanted in his nature some new appetites, propen- 
sities or aflfections ; or new strength might have 
been added to the lower principles of his nature by 
the infusion of evil. But neither of these hypotheses 
finds any countenance in the Scriptures, nor any sup- 
port from psychology. If we look at man in his 
w^orst estate, we find no constitutional traits to be obli- 
terated — no faculties or propensities to be destroyed. 
Powers essential to humanity may have become per- 
verted ; and passions which were intended to per- 
form only a subordinate part may have acquired the 
mastery of the man ; but however much we may find 
among the elements of the human constitution to 
regulate^ the most careful scrutiny furnishes us with 
nothing to destroy. Nor do we find any strength of 
passion, or perverseness of w ill, to which a rational 



HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 31 

origin may not be assigned. Such would not be 
the case, on the hypothesis of an infusion of evil into 
man's nature. 

The original transgression was committed under 
the penalty of death. This proved to be twofold, 
including the death of the body and of the soul — 
physical and spiritual death. Concerning the first 
of these, it is at least very strongly intimated, that 
man did not become mortal by positive infliction ; 
but that even the death of the body was the natural 
operation of the principle of decay in the human 
system, when cut off from access to the tree of life. 
Gen. iii, 22. Yet we should find it much easier, in 
the absence of positive proof, to believe that physical 
death w^as a matter of direct infliction, than that moral 
evil was produced by the immediate agency of God. 
From analogy, then, and still more strongly, from 
the consideration that God cannot be supposed to 
be the direct author of evil, we infer that the moral 
death which man suffered was also the result of the 
natural operation of his moral nature, after he had 
become the subject of voluntary transgression. We 
proceed, then, to inquire, — what w^ould seem to be 
the natural eflfects of transgression ? that we may 
see whether they are sufficient to meet the case — • 
sufficient to explain the extent of the depravity ex- 
hibited in the history of our fallen race. 

(1.) The first effect of transgression must un- 
doubtedly be, that God would be oflfended by it. 
And what could follow more naturally, or necessarily, 
from this, than the withdrawal from the heart of man 



32 HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

of all those gracious influences which we may sup- 
pose to have been exerted as fruits and evidences of 
the Divine favor ? 

(2.) Another legitimate and necessary effect of 
transgression, under the circumstances, must be, that 
the action of the principle of Divine love in the heart 
of man w^ould be destroyed, or at least greatly weak- 
ened. At the very moment — in the very act of trans- 
gression, fear would take the place of love ; and the 
necessary consequence of the withdrawal of the 
tokens of God's favor w^ould be, still further to 
obliterate this affection of love from the mind of the 
transgressor. 

That the principle of Divine love was originally 
implanted in the human heart, there cannot be a 
doubt. An affection was given to man corresponding 
with all the relations of life. Thus we find the pa- 
ternal affection, the filial and the fi-aternal, the affec- 
tion of friendship, the love of country and of the hu- 
man race — all naturally existing w^herever humanity 
exists. And can we suppose that God could have 
pronounced man '' good," had he not been endowed 
wuth the affection of love for Him, who w^as not only 
the author of his being, but the source and fountain 
of all moral excellence ? Nor can there be any doubt 
as to the rank which this aflfection would naturally 
maintain. And being the highest principle in the 
heart, it must of course act as does the regulator or 
governor, in a piece of complex machinery — keeping 
all the subordinate affections, the propensities, and the 
appetites in their place, allowing them only their 



HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 33 

natural and healthful exercise ; and thus producing a 
perfect harmony of action between the will of man 
and the will of God. '«Love for another," says an 
excellent writer of our own time, " always influences 
the will to do those things which please the object 
loved." Hence, in the language of the same writer, 
when God gave the Israelites the moral law <« he cou- 
pled the facts which produce affection, with the com- 
mand to obey ; saying, < I am Jehovah, thy God, 
which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, and 
out of the house of bondage, therefore^ love me and 
KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS.' Deut. vi, passim."* The 
consequences of the dethronement of this principle in 
the heart of man would of course be serious and fatal, 
just in proportion to the importance of the position 
assigned it in the human constitution. From its loss, 
then, what evils might not be expected to flow? In 
all the depravity and degradation of Adam's race, 
what do we find which cannot be traced directly to 
this source ? 

What do we find but the love of the world and the 
love of the flesh, the love of the creature predominat- 
ing over the love of the Creator ! What but anarchy 
and insubordination among all the lower principles 
of our nature ; and the loss of both physical and 
mental power, consequent on the pursuit of groveling 
objects, and the prevalence in the human heart of 
motives and passions low, "sensual and devihsh!" 
What need, then, have we to seek for any other cause 

* Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation, 



34 HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

of the irregularity and ruin which pervade human 
society? Well has Andrew Fuller said, '^All I mean 
by the terms [total depravity] is this ; that the human 
heart is by nature totally destitute^'of the love of God, 
or love to man as the creature of God, and conse- 
quently is destitute of all true virtue." 

According to the teachings of our psychology, then, 
such seem to be the consequences of transgression 
developed in our great ancestor, and such the moral 
wreck which even he exhibited. From this view 
of the subject the following deductions force them- 
selves upon us. 

(1.) That the injury consequent on Adam's sin, 
consisted in a derangement of the powers which God 
had given him ; and not in the acquisition of any 
constitutional principles in themselves evil. 

(2.) That this derangement of his moral powers 
was such as to render him incapable of keeping the 
Divine law. Even with the harmony of mental action 
found in the nature originally given to him, he was 
only equal to meeting the requisitions of God's per- 
fect law. How, then, with the moral powers de- 
ranged, the natural appetites and passions clamorous 
for gratification, and the will at least partially en- 
slaved by their action, could he come up to the re- 
quirements of this law ! 

(3.) That this incapacity did in no way tend to 
release him personally from the claims of the law 
under which God had placed him. This last infer- 
ence arises from the conclusion already arrived at, 
that the disability under which he labored was the 



HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 35 

legitimate consequence of his own voluntary act. 
The inebriate, who voluntarily renders himself insane, 
does not by such insanity release himself from re- 
sponsibility even to human laws. The same princi- 
ple will apply equally to ttie angels who by voluntary 
transgression may have left their first estate, and to 
every descendant of Adam who has brought ruin on 
himself by his own free act.* 

It has been assumed in the remarks just made, 
that these consequences did not attach to our first pa- 
rents alone. It may here be suggested, that from w^hat 
we know^ of the course of nature, we cannot readily 
conceive how^ it could be otherwise than that this 
constitution of which they had now become possessed 
should be, to some extent at least, the inheritance of 
their offspring, if offspring they were permitted to 
have. At any rate we have the assurance, that 
Adam's posterity were actually begotten 'un his own 
likeness, after his image," Gen. v, 3; and that he did 
indeed sustain such a relation to the race, that by his 
disobedience, in some sense, '•' many were made sin- 
ners." Rom. V, 19. The way in which the posterity 
of Adam were made sinners, according to the view^ we 
have taken, is simply this : that every one, in addi- 
tion to the circumstances of danger which attached 

* The arguments in support of the views which we have 
here presented, will be found stated at length by Edwards in 
his essay on Original Sin, Part iv, Chapter ii; and by Watson 
in his Institutes, Part ii, Chapter xviii. The reader is also 
referred to Upham's Mental Philosophy, Vol. ii, § 189 — 196. 



36 HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

to man's original constitution, is now subject to 
other disabilities and dangers. Among these may 
be named the following : — 

First, He is constitutionally destitute of the love 
of God, as a controlling priticiple of his nature. 

Second. As one consequence of the absence of this 
regulating principle, he early finds his appetites and 
passions, and all the lower elements of his nature 
clamorous for indulgence and impatient of control. 

Third. From his connection with a sinful world, 
he mast, on reaching the years of discretion, find 
himself more or less under the influence of habits, 
whose tendency is to inchne him to transgression 
and sin. 

Finally. It follows from all these considerations, 
that even prior to the effects of voluntary sinful in- 
dulgence, his moral power is enfeebled by Adam's 
disobedience, and he has become subject to tempta- 
tions and dangers, though not, as we can perceive, 
differing materially in their nature, yet more nume- 
rous and varied than those which attached to man's 
original condition. 

How fatally these causes, the legitimate fruits of 
the original transgression, have resulted in making 
many sinners^ the experience of the world will tell.* 

* On this subject, the reader is referred to Stuart on the 
Romans, (comment on v, 12 — 19, and Excursus^ iv, v, and vi;) 
to Knapp's Christiayi Theology, Sec. Ixxviii, with Note by the 
translator ; and to Storr and Flatt's Biblical Theology, Sections 
liii — Ivii. Also to Dr. Woods' Letters to UnitarianSy <fec., pp. 
44, 45 ; and to a letter of Dr. Taylor, in the Chiistian Speo 



HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 37 

tator, Vol. V, No. iii, Art. vi. Subsequently, in Vol. ix, No. iv, 
this Quarterly holds the following language : — " The proposi- 
tion that the descendants of Adam, wi/hout sharing in the act 
or the criminality, are, under the Divine constitution of things, 
held subject to the consequences of his first transgression; so 
that all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, 
have by nature the same moral character which he formed 
by his apostasy, and are under the same condemnation — is 
one in which Princeton, Auburn, Lane, Andover, Yale, and 
even East Windsor, can agree." — Several Wesleyan writers 
refer to the native depravity of human nature, in terms, though 
more general, yet entirely coincident with the view here pre- 
sented. The language of Watson is : " The infliction of spi- 
ritual death, which we have already shown to be included in 
the original sentence, consisted, of course, in the loss of spi- 
ritual life, which was that principle from which all right di- 
rection and control of the various powers and faculties of man 
flowed." Institutes^ Part ii, Chap, xviii. Fisk says : " The 
simple statement is, the soul has become essentially disordered by 
sin, Calv. Cont., No. x. And Dr. Hodgson remarks of de- 
pravity : ''It is something which inheres in our moral consti- 
tution, and causes a deranged action of its powers; but it is 
not a faculty — it is not an essential attribute — it is not a part 
of the constitution. Remove it, and the soul has the same 
faculties and constituents it had before. The difference caused, 
is simply this : the soul is relieved of a bias, a propensity, 
which disqualified it for obedience to God, and held its powers 
in thraldom to vice." New Divinity Examined, Chap. viii. 



38 HYPOTHETICAL PROVISIONS 



CHAPTER IV. 

An Inquiry into the Nature and Extent of the Divine Provision 
for Man's Recovery from the Moral Effects of the Fall — 
The Nature of Christian Perfection psychologically stated — 
This Doctrine held by the Christian Church, in all ages, and 
in all its branches — Three classes of writers on this subject. 

Among the conceivable arraDgements of Divine 
wisdom, in view of the original transgression, and 
its consequences, is that by which the human race 
w^ould have been cut off, — so summary an execution 
of the original threatening, as to have limited its ap- 
plication to the actual transgressors alone. Another 
arrangement is that by which the consequences of 
the transgression, whatever they were, would have 
been permitted to fall, according to the natural ten- 
dency, unmitigated and unalleviated, on all the race 
of man. Whether such an arrangement, even though 
these consequences are considered somewhat less 
fatal than we have represented them, can be con- 
ceived of as consistent with the Divine goodness or 
justice, is a quesUon w^e shall leave with the reader. 
To discuss it would be to turn aside from the subject 
in hand.* A third arrangement may be conceived, — 

* Is it possible, that this hypothesis, under any modification, 
can have become interwoven with a theory of Christian Per- 



39 

that would have released the posterity of Adam, either 
altogether or in part, from the obligations of moral 
law ; in other words, in regard to man, the moral 
law might have been altogether abrogated, or at least 
so far repealed that its claims might be graduated 
by man's enfeebled powers. Inasmuch as such a 
plan has been suggested, as indeed the one adopted 
by infinite wisdom, it is deserving of a moment's 
consideration. 



fection'? — Professor Finney, one of the Oberlin divines, seems 
to consider it an axiom, that without the provisions of the 
atonement, the race of Adam would have been continued, and 
that they would have been individually held personally respon- 
sible to keep the perfect law which had been broken; and on 
this assumption of moral obligation withmit the aid of any special 
grace, he builds a theory. — " It is a first truth of reason," says 
he, " that moral obligation implies the possession of every kind 
of ability which is indispensable to render the required act 
possible ;" and thence, he very easily and legitimately deduces 
the conclusion, that " men have not lost their natural ability 
to do tneir duty, by sin," and consequently "that the atone- 
ment and Divine influence were not necessary to make men 
able to do their duty, but to induce in them a willingness to 
do it." — Oberlin Evangelist, Vol. iv. No. 18, Aug. 31, 1842. 

The particular conclusion arising from this theory, to which 
we feel bound here to object, is — that man, though fallen, has, 
by nature, the ability requisite to do all his duty; that is, to 
keep God's holy law. The principle which the Rev. Pro- 
fessor here assumes being given, we know not but we should 
be driven to this conclusion ; but whence does he derive the 
principle 1 We decline admitting it as a self-evident propo- 
sition, especially as it leads so directly to conclusions which 
seem to conflict with such Scriptures as the testimony of our 



40 THE DIVINE LAW 

The great objection to this view, is — that it seemis 
to presuppose that the principles of rectitude are de- 
pendent upon the Divine volition, in such a sense as 
to be liable to repeal or change ; whereas it appears 
to us, that the law, to which a Being, infinite in per- 
fection, would, from the very nature of the case, 
make his intelligent creatures subject, cannot, with- 
out a species of impiety, be supposed else than per- 
fect. This law, then, of which the rule of perfect 
obedience in the garden, and the commandments 
given on Sinai, are exponents, must be the same for 
men and for angels, and for all possible created intel- 
ligences. We do not mean to be understood, that 
the immutability of moral distinctions has its origin 
in the «' nature of things," and is something extrane- 
ous to the Divine intelKgence, to which " God him- 
self is amenable, and desires to be considered as 
amenable ;" and in such a sense, that it can be said 

Lord, — " Without me ye can do nothing," John xv, 5 ; and 
with both the reasoning and the conclusion of the Apostle, 
who says, " The carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is 
not subject to the Jaw of God, neither indeed can be: so, then, 
they that are in the flesh cannot please God." Rom. viii, 7, 8. — 
And besides this Scripture objection, we have the psycho- 
logical fact, that the descendants of Adam appear to be desti- 
tute of the love of God as a natural attribute ; and, without 
this, we cannot conceive of their naturally possessing any- 
thing deserving the name of ability to keep the law of God, 
the fulfilment of which, love alone can secure. In the refer- 
ences we have made, or may make, to the advocates of this 
system, we must not, then, be considered as adopting that pe- 
culiar view of this subject. 



IMMUTABLE. 41 

to be « the duty of God" to do this or that. We 
believe, that such forms of expression* are not only- 
wanting in philosophic accuracy ; but that they pre- 
sent truth to the mind in a wrong aspect, and are 
evil in their tendency. We beUeve, nevertheless, 
that the principle on which the distinction between 
right and wrong rests, is eternal and immutable, — 
not << existing interwoven and imbedded in the na- 
ture and constitution of things ^'^'^ hwi existing as an 
element of the Divine constitution. Belonging thus 
to God himself, it is not '' a principle of nature," 
anymore than it is '< a matter of creation." It is 
neither ; but it is co-existent and co-eternal with the 
Deity. With Dr. Wardlaw, author of the Christian 
Ethics, we say : '< It is evident that there could be no 
authority extraneous to Deity, and no principles of rec- 
titude but such as had their subsistence in the Divine 
Mind."t With this immutability of moral distinc- 

* They may be found in Upham's Ment, Phi, Vol. ii, § 292 
— 295 ; and in a sermon of Prof. Finney's — *' God under obli- 
gation to do right." Oberlin Evangelist, Vol. iv, No. 19. 

f American Edition, 1835, Note D. — The reader will also 
find light thrown on this general subject by the following 
paragraphs from the Sixth Lecture : — 

" In tracing back existence, we come to the necessity of 
God's being: in tracing back prmciples, we come to the ne- 
cessity of God's character. In neither case, can we reach any 
further than this point of necessity. We are constrained to 
stop here : — and when we have thus resolved the ultimate 
principles of moral rectitude in the creature, into conformity 
with the eternal and immutable prototype of all excellence in 
the nature of the Godhead, our minds repose, in delightful sat- 

4* 



42 THE DIVINE LAW IMMUTABLE! 

tions, however sustained, any change in the require- 
ments of the law of perfection is entirely at variance. 
We cannot, then, admit it for one moment ; and 
are, therefore, driven to the conclusion that the per- 
fect law under which Adam was originally placed, 
remains unchanged, and in full force. This we be- 
lieve to be the sentiment of Christian philosophy, 

isfaction, on this secure resting-place. To talk of any fitness 
of things by which, as a standard, the rectitude of that nature 
itself is to be tried and ascertained, is as inconsiderate as it is 
profane — for, not only is this to suppose fitness existing inde- 
pendently of all being whatever, which is sheer absurdity ; 
it is, at the same time, going beyond necessity, and assuming 
something ulterior, according to which that which is necessary 
must he ; which is a plain contradiction in terms. 

" The conclusion to which we have come, while it seems 
the obvious dictate of enlightened reason, has the additional 
recommendation to the pious mind, of being eminently glori- 
fying to God. It is, that, instead of any abstract fitnesses 
being the standard or measure of the Divine nature, the Divine 
nature must itself be the origin and the standard of all fit- 
nesses ; — that, just as the necessary existence of Deity is the 
origin, or punctum sahe7ts of all other being, so the necessary 
moral principles of the Divine nature are the source and pat- 
tern of all other excellence ; and that virtue in the creature is 
conformity to this Divine original. And from this it follows 
further, that the essential principles of rectitude having ex- 
isted in Deity before creation, and being, consequently, alto- 
gether independent of the relations to which creation gave 
rise ; the fitnesses of all these relations, and of the duties re- 
spectively arising out of them, are not standards, but only 
manifestations of the principles of the Divine character, hav- 
ing all of them their origin from those principles, and being 
all of course in harmony with them.*' 



WESLEYAN AUTHORITIES. 43 

and Knapp but gives it utterance, when he says : — 
<< Moral laws are in themselves universally obliga- 
tory, and unalterable as the laws of nature."* 

The conclusion, at which we thus arrive, deduced 
from the nature of the case, is fully sustained by the 
opinion even of theologians who have differed widely 
in regard to other points. — Both Wesley and Fletcher 
sometimes expressed themselves ambiguously on this 
subject; and whether they had perfectly clear views 
of the matter, it is not important for us to decide. 
In the recent w^ork of Dr. Peck, which we ought 
to feel at liberty to take as the exponent of the Wes- 
leyan view of this subject, he says; — '«A11 admit 
that the law of perfect purity still remains, as an ex- 
pression of the inflexible holiness of God, and as the 
great rule of duty binding all moral beings to a state 
of allegiance to their rightful Sovereign."! This 
is only in accordance wdth Watson, who, speaking 
of ''the law^ of God" — ''the moral law," avers, 
" that we are under obligation to obey it as the de- 
clared will of our Creator and Lord ; — that this obli- 
gation is grounded upon our natural relation to him as 
creatures made by his power, and dependent upon 
his bounty ;" and even says, " that w^e have in the 
Gospel the most complete and perfect revelation of 
moral law ever given to men ; and a more exact 
manifestation of the brightness, perfection, and glory 
of that law", under which angels and our progenitors 
in paradise were placed, and which it is at once the 

* Christian Theology, Sec. cxviii. 

•(• Scripture Doctrine of Chiistian Perfection, Lecture xi. 



44 THE DIVINE LAW 

delight and interest of the most perfect and happy 
beings to obey."* — Dr. Clarke, referring to the same 
subject, says; — " This law, as it proceeded from the 
immaculate nature of God, was always the same. 
It was the law given to our first parents — it was suited 
to the nature of man, who was created in the image 
of God: there was nothing in it too hard for him; he 
was as the commandment — holy, just, and good : and 
it would be shockingly absurd to suppose, that when 
man, through his own fault, sinned against his God, 
and fell from his perfection, that God must then bring 
down His law to a level with his sinful imperfection, 
that he might not by transgression incur further 
penalty ! The thought, seriously indulged, is blas- 
phemy. A law, thus framed, could be no expression 
of the Divine mind — could not have his sanction, and 
could be no rule of moral action."! And, again, — 
''Though man's state has changed^ his duty is not 
changed; he is still under the same law; it is as 
much his duty now to 'love God with all his heart, 
soul, mind, and strength,' as it was the first moment 
he came out of the hands of his Creator. What was 
his duty then^ must be his duty through the whole 
course of his being. "J — Dr. Fisk says, "A disregard 
of this distinction [a distinction which he draws 
between the law and the gospel] has led some 
to the preposterous idea, that the moral law is re- 
pealed, and that the gospel which has been substi- 

* Institutes, Part iii, Chapter i. 

•\ Sermon : Life, the Gift of the Gospel, &c. 

\ Sermon: Salvation by Faith, 



IMMUTABLE. 45 

tuted for it, is a less rigorous rule of life, accommo- 
dated down to man's weak and sinful nature. As if, 
because man has become sinful, God would com- 
pound with him, and accept of something less than 
entire holiness."* And this doctrine we understand 
to have the full sanction of all the most discriminating 
Wesleyan writers. An inquiry will be made in a 
future chapter, touching the views of Wesley him- 
self in regard to it. 

Dr. Pond, who belongs to another school of theo- 
logy, when designating the points of agreement be- 
tween the Oberlin system and that of other evange- 
lical Christians, says; <<We agree in insisting that 
the moral law, the great law of love, has never been 
repealed or abated. ['< At least," says he, in a mar- 
ginal note, '' we agree in words."] It is the only 
standard of character which God has ever fixed, 
or ever will. It is in full and binding force now, in 
heaven, on earth, and throughout the intelligent uni- 
verse."! Aj^d Dr. Snodgrass, of still another school, 
speaking of the law of God, says ; — '< Other things 
may be susceptible of modification or change ; but 
this rule of conduct, like its great author, is 'the same 
yesterday, to day, and for ever.' It makes the same 
demand upon devils that it does upon holy angels, 
and the same demands upon fallen man that it did 
upon man in his primitive state. It is nothing else 
than a declaration of injunctions which are in accord- 



* Sermon : The^Properties of the Law and Gospel distinguished, 
^ Biblical Repository, Jan. 1839. Art. iii. 



46 OBJECT OF THE ATONEMENT : 

ance with the perfections of God ; and while these 
perfections continue to be what they are, he can 
accept of nothing as his law, w^hich is measured by 
a different standard, or graduated by a different 
rule."* 

As neither of the three hypothetical schemes yet 
suggested for man's restoration appears to be in ac- 
cordance with philosophic truth ; and as, in direct 
opposition to the last of these, it appears that the 
Divine law remains in all its original force ; — we feel 
compelled, in view of the lapsed and ruined condition 
of our race, to connect with this proposition the in- 
spiring conclusion, that some special provision must 
have been made to assist man in meeting the claims 
of God's perfect law. Of the nature and extent of 
this provision, we are now more particularly to 
speak. 

The preliminary conclusion just arrived at, intro- 
duces us to the third great radical doctrine to which 
we shall refer as uniting the views of all evangelical 
men ; which is — that the atonement by jesus 

CHRIST HAD, AT LEAST FOR ONE OF ITS CHIEF OBJECTS, 
THE ELEVATION OF OUR RACE. It is UOt, pcrhapS, tO 

be considered entirely impossible, that Divine wis- 
dom could have effected such elevation through 
Adam as the representative of the race ; and thus 
have rescued his posterity from the effects of the fall. 
What would have been their condition in this case, 

• Scripture Doctrine of Sanctificatmij Part ii. 



47 

or what it would have been even if our first parents 
had held fast their original possession, we know not ; 
but this we know, that by the plan which was de- 
vised, it was ordained that each individual who might 
arrive at the period of moral accountability should 
have a direct agency in working out his own des- 
tiny ; and, in view of the state into which man had 
fallen by his transgression, it seemed necessary to 
establish, as the very basis of the system provided, 
that his destiny might not be suspended on the con- 
tingency of a single transgression. For, introduced 
into the world with a constitution so deranged, no 
man could live who would never sin. To meet this 
state of things, we therefore find incorporated into 
this system a recognition of repentance and pardon, 
which, we are thus taught, involves no change in the 
great principles of God's moral government, but is 
only a new manifestation of these same eternal prin- 
ciples. 

But, in a psychological point of view, what is in- 
volved in this new — this gracious system ? What 
appears, on the very face of it, to be the nature and 
extent of the elevation which it promises to man ? 
This is a most important inquiry, that we may be 
assured that the provision made is equal to the de- 
mands of the case. 

1. Though, in the state in which we find our- 
selves on reaching the years of accountability, we 
have not, according to the view we have presented, 
any such abihty, as can be said to be a part of our 
natural constitution, to keep the perfect law of God ; 



48 OBJECT OF THE ATONEMENT*. 

yet it will nowhere be denied, that by the influences 
and aid of the Holy Spirit we can repent of our actual 
transgressions of that law, and exercise faith in the 
atoning merits'of Christ's blood ; and these are made 
the conditions whereby we may be both pardoned 
and cleansed from unrighteousness. Now there is 
involved in the very idea of pardon and forgiveness 
on the part of God, a restoration of some degree at 
least of his lost favor ; and with this would follow in a 
corresponding degree, a restoration of those gracious 
influences which had been originally exerted as the 
fruits and evidences of the Divine favor, but had been 
withdrawn in consequence of transgression. The 
restoration of these would follow the recovery of God's 
favor as naturally and necessarily as their withdrawal 
followed the transgression. We cannot conceive of 
an unqualified pardon, without a restoration of favor ; 
nor can we conceive of a restoration of favor to the 
individual, on the part of God, which could leave 
him under all the privations consequent on the 
transgressions pardoned.* 

* Professor B. B. Edwards makes the following suggestions 
in regard to the nature of the moral injury sustained by the 
fall, as also the nature of man's recovery — perfectly in accord- 
ance with the views we have presented. 

" It is frequently said, that previous to any change in the 
moral quality of an individual's actions, there must be a 
change in his nature or state; this change securing the cer- 
tainty of that. If the change of state do not precede, in the 
order of time, the change in act, it is said to be necessarily 
anterior in the order of nature. Now may not the change in 
the nature or state of Adam, which secured the certainty of 



man's entire moral restoration. 49 

2. The act of transgression, as we have seen, was 
naturally followed by the withdrawal of God's favor, 
and the consequent loss of the principle of Divine 
love in the heart of man : and what could more riatu- 



his change from a holy to a sinful choice, have been a change 
in the relative activity, or excitement of the two classes of 
susceptibilities, which he had possessed from the first] On 
this supposition those susceptibilities, which were originally 
the more lively, or had been the more excited, became now the 
less so. They had been the inward incitements to holiness ; 
they became now no longer predominant in determining the 
will ; the will then no longer obeyed the law. Those suscep- 
tibilities, on the contrary, which were originally less active or 
excited, which were kept as they were designed to be, subor- 
dinate, became now the more lively in their action, and pre- 
dominant in determining the will. Just as soon as the sensi- 
bilities, constituting the subjective incitements to sin, came, 
by the pressure of objective temptation, into more lively exer- 
cise than the opposite sensibilities, just so soon were they dis- 
proportionately, i. e. sinfully indulged. The first act of the 
will, gratifying the inordinate cravings of these sensibilities, 
was the first sin ; the apostasy. 

" If the change of nature in Adam may be said to consist 
in a change of the balance between the activity of the higher 
and that of the lower susceptibilities ; may not also the change 
of nature in regeneration be said to consist in a partial resto- 
ration of the original balance; in changing the relative state 
of the susceptibilities from the inclination toward evil to the 
inclination toward good 1 The common remark is, that in the 
new birth no new power or faculty is imparted to man ; but 
he begins, in his new state, to use for God the talent which, 
though previously possessed, was kept hidden." — German Se- 
hctions : Notes to the translation of " The Sinless character of 
Jesus." 

5 



50 OBJECT OF THE ATONEMENT : 

rally follow the restoration of this favor, than the 
return to the heart of the pardoned man of the senti- 
ment of love to his heavenly and gracious Benefactor? 
"The germinant principle of all moral evil," says 
the learned and venerable Wardlaw, <'is alienation 
of heart from God. Men may speculate without ^nd 
on the principles of morals ; but so long as they lose 
sight of this, as the real character of fallen humanity, 
they are sadly astray from truth. This enmity being 
the bitter fountain of all the streams of evil, the grand 
object must be the rectification of this fountain — the 
healing of this spring. Till this is done, nothing is 
done ; when this is done, all is done. This change 
on the inward principle and state of the heart, in pro- 
portion as it is effected, will, of necessity, rectify the 
entire constitution and character of the man, as a 
moral agent. Now this is precisely what the gospel 
professes to accomplish, and what, in hundreds of 
thousands of instances, it has proved itself capable 
of effecting. It aims at nothing less ; it can achieve 
nothing more. That which slays this enmity, and 
reconciles the heart to God in the exercise of a new 
and holy affection, does exactly what man requires, 
and what is, at the same time, indispensable to any 
radical and permanent change of character."* 

Now, as regards the strength which this <* new and 
holy affection" can acquire in the heart of the recipi- 
ent of God's favor and mercy, we cannot perceive 
that psychology furnishes any other limits than those 

* Christian Ethics, Lecture ix. 



man's entire moral restoration. 51 

which bound the goodness of God, and the glories 
and perfections of his character. The conclusion, 
then, to which we seem to be irresistibly led by the 
combined light of revelation and psychological science 
is, that while physical death remains to remind man 
of the exceeding sinfulness of sin and to form a point 
of transition from his present state of trial to his bet- 
ter abode ; the moral elevation provided for him by 
the atonement of Jesus Christ is nothing less than — 
an entire restoration to his original state of perfection. 
God's favor is restored to man ; and man loves God, 
because God has first loved him. Then only could 
he be said to <'put on the new man, which after God 
is created in righteousness and true holiness," Eph. 
iv, 24 ; and ^^ which is renewed in knowledge, after 
the image of Him that created him," Col. iii, 10, 
And we see no reason, why this love may not become 
the supreme affection of the human soul, when thus 
regenerated and created anew in the image of God — 
renewed, it is to be observed, in the same image in 
which Adam was created, embracing even the know- 
ledge essential to a moral perfection. If there is any 
philosophy in the principle, that he loves most to 
whom most is forgiven ; we might even expect a 
more intense ardor of devotion in the soul of the man 
thus «' created anew in Christ Jesus," than was ever 
exhibited by one who had never sinned, and therefore 
had nothing to be forgiven. 

In confirmation of this view, it should be added, 
that there have been many inteUigent witnesses of the 



52 DIVINE LOVE, THE GREAT ELEMENT 

high exercise of this holy affection. Edwards tells 
us, that, at a particular period of his life, merely 
seeing the name of God or Christ in a book instantly 
filled his heart with love and joy. — For twenty years, 
the journal of the pious Payson is filled with such 
passages as the following : — ^'0 how infinitely glo- 
rious and lovely did Ood in Christ appear ! I saw, 
I felt, that God w^as mine, and I his, and was un- 
speakably happy. Now, if ever, I enjoyed com- 
munion with God. He shone sw^eetly upon me, 
and I reflected back his beams in fervent, admiring, 
adoring love." — << As soon as I awoke this morning, 
my heart was filled with most intense love to God 
and Christ, so that it was even ready to break for 
the longing desires it had to go forth after God." — 
The excellent James Brainerd Taylor, more than 
three years before his death, made this entry in his 
journal : — «< Sabbath morning. — My soul has melted 
down at the presence of Jesus ! A pressure of love 
rested on me, and praise, praise, praise in a stream 
went up from my inmost soul ! — My love to God's chil- 
dren was greatly increased ; and my desire for a clean 
heart was intense. It was given ; and mine eyes ran 
down with tears — sweet tears." Who shall say of 
such a heart, that it is not indeed yi^% renewed after 
the image of God! And, in the light cast on this sub- 
ject by such experience, how well may we adopt the 
language of the Scotch divine recently quoted : — 
''If there be one end which God purposes to effect 
by the mediation of his Son, more sublimely excel- 
lent than another, it is this, — the recovery of man's 



OF HUMAN PERFECTION. 53 

nature to its pristine purity and love, and so to its 
original honor and joy." 

In the statement of the case which we have 
given, it seems to be implied, that the perfect de- 
velopment of the principle of Divine love must be 
the work of time^ and must probably involve a long 
contemplation of the Divine goodness, character and 
attributes ; whereas it is claimed for this affection, 
that it may be wonderfully and suddenly elevated by 
the simple exercise of faith and devotion. — This is, 
in the first place, a question of revelation : does the 
Bible teach that this height of Divine love may be 
attained by this short process ? Or, if the testimony 
of Scripture is not such as to be deemed conclusive 
on the point ; in the second place, is it a matter of 
experience : do good men profess to attain this per- 
fect love which casteth out fear, in this way ? It is 
not our business to examine either of these kinds of 
evidence ; but simply to say, that our psychology, 
as we understand it, furnishes no objection to this 
doctrine. We see nothing inconceivable — nothing 
inconsistent with the truest philosophy, in the doc- 
trine that the most subhme and exalted views of the 
Divine nature may be inspired in the heart of a 
good man by the direct agency of the Holy Spirit — 
such views as shall lead him to contemplate it with 
that admiring love which fills the soul with unspeak- 
able blessedness. There is, at least, from this 
source, no prima facie evidence against such expe- 
rience — no such evidence as to render the impro- 
bability of such attainment so great, as would be 



54 WHAT CHRISTIAN PERFECTION IMPLIES. 

the improbability that good and intelligent men could 
either be deceived, or would testify falsely touching 
the matter. 

Before leaving the discussion of our general prin- 
ciples, it may be well to bring together some of the 
conclusions at which we have arrived ; and to state 
very briefly and distinctly, what, and what only, ac- 
cording to these principles, is implied in the state 
of grace which we are considering. This, besides 
defining our own position, and fixing the point at 
which we have arrived, will serve as a sort of land- 
mark to which we can recur, to guide us amidst 
the conflicting theories and expositions which we 
may meet in the further prosecution of our subject. 
And— 

First. In general terms, there is implied in Chris- 
tian perfection a complete restoration to the moral 
perfection of our first parents in the garden of Eden. 
— The nature and extent of this perfection we have 
endeavored to set forth in the second chapter of our 
work.* 



* Macarms, one of the Christian Fathers, who wrote about 
the commencement of the fourth century^ says : — " Sin is root- 
ed out by the coming of the Holy Spirit, and man receives the 
original formation of Adam in his purity." Dr. Worthington 
speaks of Christian Perl'ection, as being but " another word 
for the recovery of the original perfection of our nature, to 
which, when it is arrived at its full height, I conceive," says 
he, " it will be in no respect inferior." — And quotations of this 
kind can be multiplied to any extent. 



WHAT CHRISTIAN PERFECTION IMPLIES. 55 

Second, This perfection implies a perfect harmony 
in the action of the various principles of human na- 
ture, but the destruction or eradication of none of 
them. No new principle having been implanted in 
the human heart as the consequence of sin, there is 
nothing superfluous there. 

Third. It is implied that man thus restored would 
be subject to trials and temptations — the same in their 
general nature with those of our first parents, and 
only to such. — The situation of man being now dif- 
ferent from that of the first pair, the occasions from 
which these trials and temptations arise, must of 
course be different. For example, some of them 
now arise from the frailty of the human body ; while 
doubtless, occasions of trial then existed unknown 
to us. 

Fourth, The re-establishment of the principle of 
perfect love in the heart must, of course, just so far 
as it is entire, restore the lost power to regulate and 
control the appetites and passions, to offer effective 
resistance to every assault, and to overcome every 
temptation. Thus, the love of God, when it is made 
perfect in the heart, is not a substitute for the right- 
eousness of the law ; but furnishes the power, and 
thus becomes the guaranty of its fulfilment. If such 
power was possessed by Adam, it is, doubtless, pos- 
sessed by the perfect man. And how beautifully 
does this harmonize with the statement of the apos- 
tle : — " For what the law could not do, in that it 
was weak through the flesh, God sending his own 
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, con- 



56 WHAT CHRISTIAN PERFECTION IMPLIES. 

demned sin in the flesh ; that the righteousness of 
the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after 
the flesh, but after the spirit." Rom. viii, 3, 4.* 

Fifth. A necessary and very important inference 
from our principles is, that as the restoration of this 
perfect love to the heart of the Christian does not 
secure him against trial, temptation, and danger, 
so it does not give him any perfect security against 
possible or even actual transgression, nor in any way 
conflict with the idea of his subsequent recovery. — 
The fact that Adam fell is never supposed to furnish 
any evidence that he was not previously morally per- 
fect ; and surely it cannot be supposed that a single 
transgression should cut the sanctified man off from 
the gracious provision of pardon, enjoyed even by 
the common depraved sinner. 

Sixth. We deem it important to suggest, that such 
being the nature of '< Christian Perfection," or <« en- 

* Dr. Peck, in his work on Christian Perfection, p. 294, 
puts another construction upon this passage. This criticism, 
scarcely known, as we believe, among Biblical scholars, ap- 
pears to us more ingenious than sound. And the whole train 
of reasoning with which it is connected seems entirely un- 
called for, after the admission on his part, " that the law of 
perfect purity still remains as the great rule of duty, binding all 
moral beings [man included] to a state of allegiance to their 
rightful sovereign," and after the construction he has just 
given of Wesley's views touching this subject. But more of 
this hereafter. See, on this passage, among others, the com- 
ments of Tholuck and Stuart ; and of Neander, (Planting and 
Training of the Christian Churchy Vol. ii ;) also sermon by Dr. 
Fisk, {Methodist Preacher, Vol. i, 1830.) 



A DOCTRINE OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 57 

tire sanctification," the evidence of its attainment 
must lie solely in the consciousness of the possessor, 
and in the all-pervading knowledge of the Supreme. 
On the one hand, men may act and speak so as to 
be void of offence towards man, and yet not be 
wholly under the influence of the principle of Divine 
love ; and, on the other, he who might love God with 
all the heart, from the possession still of human ap- 
petites and affections, from the susceptibility of 
strong temptation, or from the imperfection of his 
knowledge, might fail to present to the curious ob- 
server the required evidence of his entire consecration 
to God. Thus the '^ sharp contention" which Paul 
had with Barnabas, is considered, by Dr. Snodgrass, 
as one of the evidences that his mind and affections 
were not in a state of entire sanctification. We have 
thought, if Paul had ever addressed an audience in 
the language of our Saviour: — «' Ye serpents, ye ge- 
neration of vipers ! how can ye escape the damna- 
tion of hell?" Matt, xxiii, 33 ; or if it had ever been 
recorded of him, when surrounded by his enemies, 
as of the immaculate Jesus, that «' he looked round 
about on them with anger," Mark iii, 5, — whether 
these circumstances would not have furnished at 
least equally good evidence of his want of perfection 
in grace. 

The doctrine which theological writers usually ex- 
press by the terms perfection and sanctification, has 
never been lost sight of in the Christian church. It 
is embalmed in the writings of the early Fathers ; 



58 TESTIMONY OF THE CHURCH. 

it constituted an element in each of the conflicting 
creeds — Pelagianism and Augustinism ; it was held 
by Wycliff and Luther, and the reformers generally ; 
it was a doctrine of the Council of Trent, and has all 
along been recognised in the Romish church, and 
we presume it is embodied in some form in all the 
Protestant church covenants. Which of these does 
not bind its members to renounce all the vanities of 
this wicked world, all the sinful lusts of the flesh, 
and all the works of the devil, and to keep God's 
commandments all the days of their life ? — or to de- 
clare the Lord to be their God — promising to obey 
him in all things, and none else, and to deny them- 
selves of all ungodliness and every worldly lust, and 
to live soberly, and righteously, and godly, in this 
present evil world.* Dr. Snodgrass says : — '' That 
full provision is made for consummating the work 
of sanctification, as well as for its commencement 
and progress, is not doubted by any. All evangeli- 
cal Christians agree, that when the Apostle says, 
<> This is the will of God, even your sanctification,' 
he has in view the entire deliverance of those who 
embrace the gospel from the power and pollution of 
sin. Christ gave himself for the Church, < that he 
might sanctify and cleanse it' — ' that he might pre- 
sent it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, 
or wrinkle, or any such thing' — < that it should be 



* The Eighth article of the doctrinal basis adopted by the 
Evangelical Alliance recognises — "The work of the Holy 
Spihi in the conversion and sanctification of the sinner." 



LOVE THE FULFILLING OF THE LAW. 59 

holy and without blemish.' This is the grand result 
which all the institutions and influences of the gospel 
have in view, and to entertain the apprehension of a 
failure here, would be to call in question the wis- 
dom, the foresight, the veracity, and the faithfulness 
of God.* 

That the sanctification of man's nature consists in 
the full development there of the principle of love^ is 
perhaps doubted by as few. An inspired apostle 
said, <•<' Love is the fulfilling of the law ;" and in per- 
fect accordance with this, Dr. Snodgrass, in the work 
just referred to, says : — '' As left by him, [the great 
Teacher,] the law of God required men, in view of a 
clearer revelation of <• eternal judgment' than had 
ever been made before, to love the Lord their God 
with all their heart, with all their soul, with all their 
miiid, and with all their strength. To this law, then, 
we are amenable now. And, if there is any one 
among all our thoughts, words, or actions, which is 
not up to the standard of its requisiiions — if we vary 
from them in any one affection or emotion of the soul 
— if we depart, for an instant, from the exercise of 
supreme affection for God, or unadulterated charity 
towards our fellow men — then we are not entirely 
sanctified." Pp. 25, 26. Thus he makes entire 
sanctification to consist in perfect love. Archbishop 
Usher, as quoted by Dr. Peck, says the two cove- 
nants <'<• declare one kind of righteousness, and that 
this righteousness is ' the perfect love of God, and of 

* Scripture Doctrine of Sanctificatian, Part ii. 



60 THREE CLASSES OF BELIEVERS. 

our neighbor.' " Dr. Wardlaw says : — << The moral 
law of revelation is the same with the moral law in 
the heart of the first man."* And, again ; — " The 
two great principles of the Divine law, as given to 
men, are, the love of God, and the love of our neigh- 
bor ; and there are the strongest grounds for believ- 
ing that these, substantially, .are the principles of 
morals throughout the universe : that in all w^orlds, 
love to the Creator and love to fellow creatures con- 
stitute « the fulfilling of the law.' "f And this we 
believe to be the common voice of evangelical Chris- 
tian writers, when properly interpreted. 

It will answer the practical purpose we have in 
view, to arrange all those who have held the doctrine 
of the entire sanctification of man's nature, into three 
classes : — (1) those who have considered it unattain- 
able in this life ; (2) those who have considered it 
attainable, though never attained ; and (3) those who 
have considered it attainable and sometimes practi- 
cally attained in the actual experience of the Chris- 
tian. We shall proceed to apply the subject, in the 
future chapters of our work, according to this ar- 
rangement. 

* Christian Ethics^ Sec. v. f Sec. ix. 



IS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION ATTAINABLE? 61 



CHAPTER V. 

A Remark on the true Value of Psychological Investigations, 
as connected with Questions of Theology. — The Old Presby- 
terian Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's 
Moral Nature is not attainable in this Life, compared with 
the Principles laid down in the foregoing Sections. 

Dr. Woods seems to think, that the attainableness 
of complete holiness in this life is a doctrine which 
has been maintained by devout Christians and ortho- 
dox divines, in all ages.* We cannot believe, that 
the learned Dr. intended to exclude from the class 
of devout Christians or orthodox divines all whom 
we believe most distinctly and unequivocally to have 
denied this doctrine. We feel compelled to include 
among those who have made such denial, some of 
the early reformers, Calvin, and from him a succes- 
sion of divines — including the Westminster Assembly 
— down to Dr. Snodgrass, and his reviewer in the 
Biblical Repertory. f 

W^hether entire holiness, or the perfect love of God, 
can be attained in this life — is a question w^hich it 
would be foreign to our purpose fully to discuss. 



* An Examination of the Doctrine of Perfection, p. 1 5. 
f Vol. xiv, No. iii, July 1842. 

6 



62 PHILOSOPHY AND THE SCRIPTURES. 

We have in view, in this and the subsequent chap- 
ters, simply to apply the principles we have already 
laid down to the various questions which have arisen 
touching our general subject ; and we attempt such 
an application to the question now before us with the 
more confidence, because most of our leading conclu- 
sions, having any reference to this particular point, 
have so fully coincided with the views of this class 
of theologians. — We would not be misunderstood 
as to the importance we attach to the mode in which 
we have chosen to present this subject. Should the 
apparent deductions of philosophy conflict with the 
direct teachings of Scripture, the former must yield. 
When the teachings of Scripture, however, as in tliis 
case, do not unite the judgments of biblical scholars, 
the careful deductions of philosophy may be brought 
in to aid ^us in our conclusions. As regards the 
Scripture arguments on this question, we shall leave 
the reader to make an application of our principles 
to them. To the other arguments, however, so far at 
least as adduced by Dr. Snodgrass,* we must give a 
passing notice. Here we meet on equal ground. 
Here the question is — not what is directly revealed ; 
but what are the most natural and necessary deduc- 

* The work to which we here refer is that from which we 
have before quoted: — " The Scripture Doctrine of Sanciificationi 
Suited, and Defended against the Error of Perfectionism^ By W. D. 
Snodgrass, D. D., Philadelphia : Presbyterian Board of Pub- 
lication, 1841." — We have given it the prominence it has here 
received, not more on account of the standing of its author, 
than because it has the recent sanction of a large church. 



IS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION ATTAINABLE? 63 

tions from the more indirect intimations which God 
has seen fit to give us of his will and of his designs. 
To answ^er the former question, the letter of God's 
word alone needs to be studied ; to answer the lat- 
ter, we need to study God himself as he has revealed 
himself to us, and man to whom he has made his 
revelation — man as he was, man as he is, and man 
in all the relations in which he stands to his Maker 
and to his fellows. We deem it legitimate to say- 
that he who confines himself to the former study must 
be a dogmatist ; w^hile he alone who gives his thoughts 
a wuder range, and studies the Bible in connection 
with its great author on the one hand, and in con- 
nection with the human soul and the destinies of the 
human race on the other, may hope to acquire some 
adequate conception of the great scheme of human 
redemption. 

And we may introduce our remarks on the ques- 
tion before us, by premising in regard to this grace 
of perfect love to God and man, which Dr. S. fully 
agrees with us in defining, and which he speaks of 
as being indispensable to our admission to the king- 
dom of heaven, — that if it can be acquired before 
death, it must not only add unspeakably to the hap- 
piness of the individual, but must also tend to the 
promotion of every other Christian grace. To sup- 
pose, as some have done, that humility, or any other 
virtue could be promoted by the absence of supreme 
love, the absence of that which constituted the chief 
element in man's original perfection, and w^hich alone 
can admit him to an inheritance with the saints in 



64 IS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION 

light, would be the height of absurdity. Its presence 
is all that is necessary to ensure the perfect develop- 
ment of every other moral excellence. Yet Dr. S. 
seems to think there is an utter incongruity between 
this state and our present mortal condition. 

To him it appears, that this state would " admit of 
no progression," p. 27 ; that if attained, the Chris- 
tian's " work would be finished, and his obligations 
all discharged," pp. 38, 39 ; he would '^have no- 
thing more to do in the warfare against sin," p. 46 ; 
but might '' rejoice over the dying struggles of his 
last enemy, and lay aside his armor, because the war 
was ended." p. 75. He would be exempt from trials 
and afflictions, p. 76 ; and would have no further 
need of prayer or the means of grace, p. 81 ; and his 
knowledge of the truth would have to be perfect, p. 83. 
The reply furnished by the view we have taken is — 
that not one of these remarks applies to the image 
and likeness of God in which Adam was created, and 
of which sanctification is but the renewal. His con- 
dition, we have always supposed, admitted of pro- 
gression ; and w^e cannot doubt, but Dr. S. will fully 
agree with us when we say, that our best conceptions 
of the heavenly state, where there will be none but 
the sanctified, are — that it too will be a state of end- 
less progression. Adam had duties to perform, and 
obligations to discharge — obligations of obedience, 
and of watchfulness, to preserve the image and like- 
ness of God in which he had been created. He had 
a warfare too ; and the result proved but too well, 
that he was not at liberty to lay aside his armor. 



ATTAINABLE? 65 

He, therefore, had his trials and afflictions, and needed 
at least constant communion with God ; nor are we 
aware that intimation is anywhere given that his 
knowledge of truth w^as perfect. Again, this state 
of moral perfection appears to Dr. S., to be inconsist- 
ent with 'fc a state of suffering," or with any of the 
evils w^hich sin has introduced, p. 79; and of course 
totally at variance with the idea of '' corruptible bo- 
dies." p. 87. The reply furnished to this is — that 
physical perfection is here presupposed as an element 
in the sanctification of man's nature, whereas w^e 
have seen that they have no connection. Thus it is, 
that our Saviour, perfect though he w^as, suffered and 
died — thus experiencing the severest natural '<• evil" 
that sin has produced. He '' who did no sin," suf- 
fered as we sutfer — thus " leaving us an example 
that w^e should follow his steps," 1 Pet. ii, 21, 22; 
and the sanctified man would probably be the last to 
conclude, that it is not enough that the servant be as 
his Lord.* 

The work before us presents another view of tliis 

* An able writer in the London Quarterly Review presents this 
subject in its true light, when he incidentally refers to the 
confounding of moral with physical corruption, as at the basis 
of Monasticism : — " The Scriptural — let us be permitted to use 
the word Pauline — ideas of evil and its antagonist Christian 
perfection, are widely difierent from those of monastic Chris- 
tianity. In St. Paul, the evil principle is moral degeneracy; 
in the other, the moral is blended up with some vague notion 
of physical corruption ; the body itself, as formed of malignant 



66 IS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION 

subject. Dr. S. seems, in several places, most dis- 
tinctly to admit that the state in question is attaina- 
ble ; but that when attained — '' when the Christian 
has arrived at perfection, he will no longer be kept 
from the possession and enjoyment of his reward," 
p. 74; — <<when perfectly delivered from sin, it [the 
soul] will be emancipated at once — will put off the 
tabernacle, in which it has lived, while sojourning 
in this vale of tears — and rise to the mount, in which 
it is to be < clothed upon' with another and a better 
< house, which is from heaven.' " p. 91. In one other 
place at least, this view is set forth with great dis- 
tinctness. Speaking of '« the advancement of the 
kingdom of God, both in the w^orld in general, and 
in the hearts of believers in particular," he says : — <' It 
is like any of the ordinary seeds, which are cast into 
the ground, with a view to the raising of a crop. They 
bring forth, not by an instantaneous, or very speedy 
production, but^first the blade, then the ear, and, 
after that, the full corn in the ear.' And, in regard 
to this similitude, it is especially in point to remark, 
that the Author of the parable [concerning the ' grain 
of mustard seed,'] interposes the declaration, that 
'when fruit is brought forth, immediately the hus- 
bandman putteth in the sickle, because the harvest 
is come.' There is no time permitted to elapse, be- 



matter — of matter inherently antagonistic to God, is irreclaim- 
ably corrupt." No. clii, Art. i. 

When will men cease to corrupt the truth of God with their 
own inventions ! 



ATTAINABLE ? 67 

tween the ripening and the in-gathering of the fruit. 
The one event follows the other, not only in the order 
of nature, but without an interval. And thus, the 
Great Teacher w^ould have us to understand, it will 
ever be in the kingdom of grace. When the plants 
of righteousness have grow^n to maturity, they will no 
longer be permitted to stand in the open field of the 
present world. The purpose of their growth, here, 
will then be answered ; and without any farther de- 
lay, they wdllbe gathered into the garner of God.'' 
Pp. 71, 72. 

Whether this view is consistent with the general 
proposition of the book, <' That entire sanctification 
in this life is not an attainable state," it is not our 
business to inquire ; but simply to see, since the view 
has been presented, whether our principles can throw 
any light upon it. The only reason assigned or inti- 
mated, why death should be instantly executed upon 
the individual who has become perfect in love, is, — 
that with him the great business of life is fully ac- 
complished — << the purpose of his growth here is then 
answered." In the first place, this presupposes what 
our system does not admit, to wit, that the sanctified 
state is not one admitting of progress and improve- 
ment. Our Saviour, as we have seen, when a youth 
« grew in favor with God ;" and, as the Son of Man, 
^'was made perfect through suffering." Again this 
makes life a very selfish matter. Is there nothing for 
man to do, either as a primary or secondary business, 
but to secure his ow^n salvation ? Such was not the 
doctrine of Paul ; <' I am in a strait betwixt two ;" 



68 IS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION ATTAINABLE? 

said he, «^ having a desire to depart, and to be with 
Christ, which is far better ; nevertheless to abide in 
the flesh is more needful for you." In a similar 
spirit, Dr. Payson says of himself, ''I was in a strait 
betwixt two, having a desire to be with Christ, and 
yet wishing to stay, that I might tell others what a 
precious Saviour he is." We confess this appears 
to us a better Christian philosophy than that which 
teaches that man lives for himself alone. 

That there is no natural tendency in the death of 
the body, in any way to improve the moral condition, 
nor any natural tendency in the perfection of the 
moral nature, to produce the death of the body, are 
propositions which require no proof. Any such doc- 
trine, then, as that on which we have just animad- 
verted, rests, or ought to rest, solely on the revealed 
wdll of God ; especially when we have the fact before 
us, that our Saviour lived in this world of sin, of suf- 
fering and of death, thirty-three years, nor left it till 
he was put to death by wicked hands ; — thus demon- 
strating that there is no natural impossibility, that a 
perfect moral nature can for a time dwell amidst a 
scene of both natural and moral evil. And we are 
told, that "whoso keepeth His word, in him verily is 
the love of God perfected ;" and that if such an one 
would abide in Christ, he ought, o^f^ft, "himself also 
to walk, even as He walked." 1 John ii> 5, 6. This 
is all that is necessary ; and if he ought to do it, who 
shall say that it cannot be done ! With him who ho- 
nestly inquires what is truth ? we beUeve these brief 
suggestions must have great weight. 



HAS IT BEEN ATTAINED? 69 



CHAPTER VI. 

The Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's Nature 
is attainable in this Life, though never attained, compared 
with the Principles of the former Sections of this Book. 
Views of some of the New England Divines examined. 

We shall delay but for a moment on the theory 
which admits the state of Christian Perfection to be 
attainable — '< metaphysically attainable," but denies 
the fact of its attainment,'^ So far as the argument 
in support of this position rests upon the uninspired 
examination of character, our principles pronounce 
it entirely inconclusive ; first, because from the very 
nature of the case, the possession of the perfect love 
of God in the heart cannot be a matter of observa- 
tion at all. It must rest with the individual's own 
consciousness and his God. Second, because the 
most palpable evidence of actual sin on the part of 
any one would not prove that he had never been in 
possession of this grace. We have never seen any 

* The readers of the American Biblical Repository have seen 
this doctrine very distinctly stated and strongly defended by 
Rev. Dr. Pond, and Rev. Mr. Folsom, in the numbers for Jan. 
and July, 1839; and by Rev. Dr. Woods, in the numbers for 
Jan. and July, 1841. 



VO HAS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION ' 

intelligent defender of the doctrine of Christian Per- 
fection refer to it as necessarily, or from its nature 
precluding the possibility of subsequent transgres- 
sion.* Adam sinned, though in the image and like- 
ness of God ; nor does the view we have taken pre- 
sent any condition of mortal man, in which he is 
exempt from temptation and fall. The question of 
fact^ then, which these wTiters have raised, must be 
settled by testimony alone ; and, (inspiration apart,) 
by testimony relating to the individual experience of 
the witness. In this case, the sole question to be put 
is, — Do you, or do you not, love God with all the 
heart ? for this, as it furnishes the only guaranty of 
perfect obedience, must be the surest test of the 
attainment of this perfect grace. f And we cannot 

* By the occasional use of such phrases as " permanent," 
holiness, and " perpetual" holiness, we think President Mahan 
has put into the hands of his opponents a very effiective wea- 
pon. At best, such phrases are ambiguous; and, as such, it 
seems to us, should be avoided. 

I We know not whence the authority is derived of making 
such a hypothetical "disinterested benevolence," the test of 
sanctification, as would make us willing to be sent to hell, 
should God demand it. (See Oberlin Evangelist, Vol. iv, No. 
19.) The truest philosophy, as it seems to us, proclaims it 
sufficient, that the full assent of the heart be given to what 
God does require. Dr. Wardlaw says, (Christian ElhicSy Chap, 
viii,) — " When men have spoken of the duty and possibility 
of retaining love to God, and rejoicing in his being glorified, 
although the glory should arise from being themselves 'thrust 
down to hell,' and made the victims of endless perdition, — 
they have spoken, I apprehend, very unadvisedly, understand- 



EVER BEEN ATTAINED? tl 

admit the suggestion of Dr. Pond, that the testimony 
of those who shall reply in the affirmative is to be 
rejected, because "persons often think of themselves 
more highly than they ought to think;" for in so 



ing neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm ! The truth 
is/' he further remarks, "that all such suppositions are, in 
their very nature, blasphemous. They ought never to be so 
much as admitted into the mind; because, however much, in 
words, they may seem to glorify God, they do, in reality, most 
fearfully dishonor him." 

Even the discussion of Dr. Upham, m Chap, xii of his Inte- 
rior or Hidden Life, in regard to " disinterested love," appears 
to us to consist of little more than mere unauthorized specula- 
tions. And besides, to make it practical, would require a 
power of mental analysis which few — perhaps none, possess. 
Dr. Chalmers, as we think, with great propriety, remarks: — 
"When the same Being combines, in his own person, that 
which ought to excite the love of moral esteem, with that which 
ought to excite the love of gratitude, — the two ingredients enter 
with a mingled, but harmonious concurrence into the exercise 
of one compound affeclion.^^ — (Depravity of Human Nature: Serra.x.) 
And Dr. Wardlaw. with equal felicity of expression, says, in 
regard to holy beings ; — "As holy, they love God for his holi- 
ness ; as happy, they love God as the Author of their happi- 
ness." And he denies, that even with holy beings, the disin- 
terested love recognised by the class of writers to which Dr. 
Upham belongs is, "the perfection of love to God." On the 
contrary, he says : — " We contend that it is essentially defec- 
tive ; and that such perfection consists, neither in the love of 
complacency alone, nor in the love of gratitude alone, but in 
the union of both. We contend that in the bosom of a holy 
creature they are incapable of distinct subsistence, gratitude 
without complacency, or complacency without gratitude. Now 



72 HAS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION 

doing we give up the only direct proof of which the 
case admits. Where there is no palpable evidence 
of moral or mental obliquity, candor cannot but de- 
cide that the testimony — relating as it does to a mat- 
ter of consciousness — must be admitted ; and if ad- 
mitted, it would be conclusive of the question, even 
though it could be shown that <' Augustine," and 
<<Bunyan," and "Brainerd," and <'Payson," and 
"Edwards," and ten thousand more, had testified 
that they did not love God with all the heart. The 
testimony, "Whereas I was blind, now^ I see," was 
not the less true, because it was the experience of 
but one man in Jerusalem ; nor was it the less true, 
even when the arrogant and supercilious Pharisees 
cast him out who bore the testimony, saying, "Thou 
wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach 
us ?" 

But this same suggestion, being made by Dr. 
Woods, demands further attention. He says, in his 
second article, — "I am persuaded, that those who 
think themselves completely sanctified are mis- 
taken," &c. p. 437. The connection in which this 

it is obviously from the state of the principle in the bosom of 
such a creature, that our notion of its perfection must be 
formed; — and if there the two are in union, why is a purer 
and a loftier disinterestedness, according to the false notions 
of the system which requires it, to be demanded of man when 
regenerated from his sinful debasement, than existed in man 
during his original innocence and glory T' — We commend to 
the inquirer on this subject, the entire Eighth Lecture of his 
Christian Ethics. 



EVER BEEN ATTAINED? 73 

remark stands leads us to suppose that it is not in- 
tended for those only who profess entire sanctifica- 
tion without knowing either w^hat it is in itself, or 
w^hat are the fruits which it ought to produce ; but 
that it is judged equally applicable to the most intel- 
ligent of those w^ho profess to have attained this state 
of grace. The question, then, is not whether some 
are mistaken in this matter ; but whether all are mis- 
taken. And on such a question, w^e might w^ell refer to 
the vast number connected w^ith the various branches 
3f the church of God, who have believed and testified 
that their love to God and man was perfect ; and to 
the intelligence and undisputed piety of many of these. 
Although we have admitted that the outward walk 
of the Christian cannot be considered as of itself fur- 
nishing undoubted evidence of the possession of this 
grace ; yet, in the case of him who bears testimony 
to its possession, we might urge, that where the pro- 
fession is accompanied with the appropriate fruits, 
these cannot but add vastly to the credibility of the 
witness. The bare reference to these points is suffi- 
cient ; and for brevity's sake we wull make but two 
formal suggestions in regard to the ground here taken 
by Dr. W. 

(1.) Our psychology presents us with conscious- 
ness as one of the most authoritative grounds of be- 
lief. When, therefore, any one professes to have 
attained this perfection of love, at the same time de- 
fining it intelligibly, and describing the phenomena 
connected with it, he cannot be supposed to be de- 
ceived in the matter, without at the same time un- 

7 



74 HAS CHRISTIAN PERFECTION 

settling the laws of belief to an extent dangerous 
both to philosophy and religion. 

(2.) Most of those who believe this state of grace 
attainable, believe that it is accompanied with the 
witness of the Spirit, The Scriptures teach, accord- 
ing to both Calvinistic and Arminian writers, that 
we may expect the testimony of tJie Spirit of God to 
the truth of our adoption ; and the argument, as 
stated by Dr. Peck, is, — << that if a sensible [con- 
scious] evidence of adoption may be expected, the 
same kind of evidence may be expected, with in- 
creased lustre, to accompany the different stages of 
our progress in holiness." p. 444. — We do not at- 
tach great weight to this merely analogical argument. 
And yet if any of those professing the high attain- 
ment of perfect love claim such a witness as a part 
of their experience, it is but candid to admit that 
our psychology presents no objection to such claim 
— no objection to the witness of the Spirit, either in 
general, or in the case of the sanctified person in 
particular. The Scriptures present it as the very 
office of the Holy Spirit to communicate with the hu- 
man heart ; and if Satan could make a strong im- 
pression on the Saviour's mind by presenting to him 
thoughts and passages of Scripture, we see no rea- 
son why the Holy Spirit may not in the same w^ay 
furnish the necessary evidence to the Christian of 
his progress in holiness. 

Commending these considerations to all who have 
felt inclined to be influenced by the reasonings on 
which we have thus briefly animadverted, we pass 



EVER BEEN ATTAINED? 76 

from this part of the subject, with but a single sug- 
gestion, as the result of some observation, that the 
deepest piety is probably not generally found in pub- 
lic life — not even among those who are the leaders 
in the church of God. We claim to be no enthu- 
siasts on this subject ; and yet as we have looked 
abroad upon this world of outrage and injury, of po- 
verty, of suffering, and of death, and have seen the 
patient endurance of wrong, and oppression, and 
want, and pain, — as we have seen the divine sub- 
mission to the will of God with which the parent 
often gives up his dearest offspring to death and the 
grave, and have heard from the couch of languishing 
the expression of pious confidence— <« though he 
slay me, yet wall I trust in him," and even from the 
bed of death the triumphant exclamation — «<0 
death, where is thy sting ! O grave, w^here is thy 
victory !" — as w^e have seen and heard all these 
things, we have been led to indulge more cheering 
views, than those which we oppose ; and to believe 
that though << Noah, Job, and Daniel," and even 
Paul may have sinned; yet that there are more at all 
times in the Christian church who feel and know 
that God has shed abroad his perfect love in their 
hearts, than were found in Israel in the days of Eli- 
jah, who had not bowed the knee to Baal. If an 
error, to us at least it is a pleasing one ; and w^e 
would not readily abandon it till we can be assured 
by evidence which has not yet been presented, that 
it is of dangerous tendency as it regards either our- 
selves or others. 



76 THE WESLEYAN SYSTEM 



CHAPTER VII. 

The Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's Na- 
ture is practically attainable in this Life — partially consi- 
dered — The Wesleyan Theory : — Firsty Wesley's Views ap- 
parently discordant — Second, Dr. Peck's new " Standard of 
duty" and " of obedience" under the Gospel Dispensation, 
examined — Third, The discrepances of Wesley's System 
explained, and the Views of several modern Wesleyan 
Writers stated. 

In this and the succeeding chapters, we propose 
to notice some of those who have considered the 
state of entire sanctification as both attainable, and 
sometimes practically attained in this life. Our lead- 
ing object will be, by comparing the peculiar doc- 
trines of some of these with the view w^hich we have 
presented, to see how far they agree with each other, 
and in what respects they differ ; with reference to 
finding some common ground on which they may 
come together. In this inquiry, there seems a pro- 
priety in first referring to the theory of Christian Per- 
fection as stated and defended by the founder of 
Methodism.* And one of the first and most obvious 

* In this chapter, the quotations made from Wesley are 
taken from his Plain Account of Christian Perfection, except 
where there are marginal references. 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFE9TION. 77 

remarks in regard to the Wesleyan system, is, that it 
has all along been exposed to two opposite classes of 
objections. By placing the attainable perfection of 
the Christian character high — requiring nothing less 
than perfect love to God and man, Wesley laid him- 
self open to an attack which has been kept up with 
more or less vigor by the theologians of the Calvin- 
istic school, down to the present day. On the other 
hand, by saying that " no man is able to perform the 
service which the Adamic law requires," that '« no 
man is obliged to perform it," that " we are not now 
under the angelic or the Adamic law," &c., he has, 
in the estimation of many, exposed himself to the 
charge of placing the standard of perfection under the 
Christian dispensation below that originally fixed by 
the law of God — the moral law. And we cannot doubt, 
but that the expositors of this system will feel com- 
pelled soon to admit, that there is some discrepancy 
in Wesley's writings on this subject ; or, at least, 
that there are some important points left undecided 
by him. Christian perfection, he affirms to be '< an 
entire renewal in the love and image of God" — "the 
renewal of the heart in the whole image of God, the 
full likeness of him that created it," — he even calls it 
" salvation from sin ;" and yet does not believe it to 
" exclude," or to be inconsistent with — what he de- 
signates "transgressions of the Divine law." 

Occupying this position, he hesitates, as well he 
may, whether or not to call Christian perfection 
*< sinless." As late as the year 1776, this question 
\fith him is undecided. Speaking of this perfection, 



78 THE WESLEY AN SYSTEM : 

he asks, << Is it sinless ?" and answers: <<Itis not 
worth while to contend for a term : it is < salvation 
from sin.' " Here then we have, in the same essay, 
the two propositions, that it is " salvation from sin," 
and yet that it admits <•<' transgressions of the Divine 
law." Now this '^ Divine law" is either in force on the 
Christian, or it is not. If it is in force, and even the 
perfect man is constantly violating it, how can he be 
said, in any important sense, to be <' saved from 
sin ?" or with what propriety could his perfection be 
called << sinless" ? It seems to us, that there is here 
something more than a term to contend for. And if 
this law is not in force, why hesitate, because of its 
violations, to call perfection sinless'? or why provide 
for these violations, as he has done, by the blood of 
atonement, and the intercession of Christ ? . 

It seems perfectly obvious to us, that Wesley 
never intended to attach himself to that horn of this 
dilemma, which would do away with the present 
binding force of the original law — the law of perfect 
purity. The writings of that distinguished man fur- 
nish evidence that the prevailing idea in his mind 
was, that this law is abolished only as a law of 
works — only in the sense of admitting no repentance ; 
we believe he meant only, that man is not now to 
be judged by it as originally administered, — unde- 
viating obedience no longer being the condition of 
salvation. Indeed, in any other sense than this, he, 
with sufficient formality, denies that it has been 
abolished; and, on the contrary, affirms of "the moral 
law" — that law which '< was from the beginning of 



OBJECTION TO DR. PECk's STATEMENT OF IT. 79 

the world, being « written, not on tables of stone,' 
but on the hearts of all the children of men, when 
they came out of the hands of their Creator," — that 
<« every part of this law^ must remain in force upon all 
mankind, and in all ages ; as not depending either 
on time or place, or any other circumstances liable 
to change, but on the nature of God, and the nature 
of man, and their unchangeable relation to each 
other."* And though we have already concluded 
that the law, considered as a rale of duty, remains 
unchanged, we have at the same time concluded that 
there has actually been such a change in the admin- 
istration of this law as is here suggested. This is all 
that Dr. Peck thinks Wesley means, when he speaks 
of it as having been « abolished" — as having " van- 
ished away," &c.; and it is in defence of this position 
that he uses the language quoted in a preceding 
chapter : — " All admit that the law of perfect purity 
still remains as the great rule of duty binding all 
moral beings," &c. Yet there is reason to believe, 
that this is not the interpretation put upon Wesley 
by many of his readers and admirers. 

It cannot be concealed, that when Dr. Peck him- 
self tarns aside from the actual defence of Wesley's 
views to give us his own, he immediately sets about 
doing that, from which, if we understand him, he 
had just defended Wesley. We find him pointing 
out " the difference between the original law of 
perfect purity, and the law of love, as incorporated 

• Fifth Discourse upon the Sermon on the Mount. 



80 

in the gospel," in these words : — " One is an ex- 
pression of the Divine will concerning beings per- 
fectly pure, in the full possession of all their original 
capabilities ; but the other is an expression of the 
Divine will concerning fallen beings restored to a 
state of probation by the mediation of Christ. Each 
alike requires the exercise of all the capabilities of 
the subjects ; but the subjects being in different cir- 
cumstances, and differing in the amount of their ca- 
pabilities, the standard of obedience is, from the ne- 
cessity of the case, varied." Again, he says : — '« The 
standard of character set up in the gospel must be 
such as is practicable by man, fallen as he is. Com- 
ing up to this standard is what we call Christian 
perfection. But the opposers of this doctrine vehe- 
mently object to the idea of admitting any thing short 
of perfect and unsinning obedience, according to the 
claims of the original law. No allowance must be 
made for our infirmities. Circumstances must not 
be taken into the account in fixing the standard of 
duty. And the opposite view is represented as run- 
ning into the grossest absurdities," &c. Pp. 292, 
294. 

Now, if these extracts can be considered as mean- 
ing what the phraseology most naturally implies, 
they teach, — Firsts That there is set up in the gos- 
pel a new " standard of obedience" and ^'of duty," 
<< such as is practicable by man, fallen as he is," — 
a standard which, when reached, is to be called 
<< Christian perfection," though it comes short of 
<<the claims of the original law." And, second^ 



OF THE WESLEYAN SYSTEM. 81 

That this new standard is " the law of love as incor- 
porated in the gospel." 

Both these positions obviously conflict with the 
principles we have presented. It is not our chief 
object to inquire whether they are or are not sus- 
tained by Wesley ; and yet this is a question in 
which we feel some interest, since the announcement 
that they are the doctrines of Wesley might prepos- 
sess some scores of the readers of these pages in 
their favor. The cause of truth, then, demands such 
inquiry. 

The passage, which, of all Wesley's writings, per- 
haps, sympathizes most with the statement of Dr. 
Peck here given, is found in his sermon on Perfec- 
tion ; and is as follows: — <'The highest perfection 
which man can attain, while the soul dwells in the 
body, does not exclude ignorance and error, and a 
thousand other infirmities. — Hence, the best men 
may say from the heart, 

< Every moment, Lord, I need 
The merit of thy death/ 

for innumerable violations of the Adamic as well as 
the angelic law. It is well, therefore, for us, that we 
are not under these, but under the Law of Love. — 
< Love is^ now « the fulfilling of the law,"^ which is 
given to fallen man. This is now, with respect to 
us, « the pefect law.'^ " — Now this, taken by itself, 
we must admit appears very much like the doctrine 
on which we are remarking. But Wesley, in his 
sermons and other theological writings, is either 



82 OBJECTION TO DR. PECK^S STATEMENT 

consistent with himself, ©r he is not. If he is not, 
then his authority must be far from conclusive on 
either side of the question. If, however, he is 
consistent with himself, then it will be sufficient 
to inquire whether his general theological system 
supports the positions of Dr. Peck ; for if it does 
not, it follows, of course, that such isolated pas- 
sages as that we have quoted must admit of an 
interpretation consistent with his system, and can- 
not, therefore, be supposed to support these posi- 
tions. 

In regard to the first point in question, the quota- 
tion just made from one of Wesley's discourses upon 
the Mount is very conclusive, where he says that 
every part of the original law ^^must remain in force 
upon all mankind, and in all ages." While treating, 
however, of ihe specific subject of the law,* he is 
even more explicit. He speaks of '<■ the law which 
was originally given to angels in heaven, and man 
in paradise," as one and the same law. The com- 
mandments inscribed on the tables of stone in Sinai, 
are spoken of as but <^ the heads" of this same law ; 
and it is this same law, too, << which God has so mer- 
cifully promised to write afresh in the hearts of all 
true believers." And this law — originally given to 
angels, then to man in paradise, and now written on 
the heart of the Christian — he calls '< The immutable 
rule of right and wrong. '''^ In perfect accordance 



* See Sermon : The Original , Nature, Properties, and Use of the 
Law, 



OF THE WESLEYAN SYSTEM. 83 

•with such statements as these, thus formally made, 
we have never found Wesley, in unambiguous terms, 
attempting to graduate " the standard of obedience" 
by '' the capabilities of the subjects," or ''fixing the 
standard of duty" by the " infirmities" or the " cir- 
cumstances" of man, considered as a '* fallen being." 
On the contrary, this law itself- — this " copy of the 
eternal mind" — this " transcript of the Divine na- 
ture" — '< is adapted in all respects to every indivi- 
dual^ and is suited to all the circumstances of 
each,"^^ 

We might stop here. But we will take occasion 
at this point to say, further, that as we feel com- 
pelled to understand Wesley, he not only never 
speaks of any law^ but the ceremonial, as having 
passed away ; but he never speaks of any law" as 
having undergone any change, except to lay aside 
its character of a covenant, or system of works. 
" The law of faith" is indeed contrasted by him 
with what Dr. Peck calls " the law^ of perfect pur- 
ity ;" not however as a rule of life — a " standard of 
d'lty," but only as a " condition of justification or 
salvation." In that sense it is not supposed that any 
statute of the moral law is in force, or that any works 
are required of man ; and yet works are required of 
him — " duty" and " obedience" are required ; and 
the precise question before us is, — What is the 
standard of duty and obedience which has been fixed 
for man, and which, w^hen renew^ed by grace, he may 
be expected to attain ? The standard fixed must 
undoubtedly be — the law, whatever it is, w^hich God 



84 OBJECTION TO DR. PECk's STATEMENT 

writes by the sanctifying influence of his Holy Spirit 
on the heart of the believer ; and this, Wesley tells 
us, in a quotation just made, is the same law which 
was " given to angels in heaven, and to man in 
paradise"— the law of perfect purity. And this law^ 
Dr. Fisk says expressly,"*^ << is a rule of life for the 
holy ;^^ while he calls the gospel^ '' a provision of life 
for the unholy." — Our search has not been partial, 
and yet we must say, that we can find no alliance 
between this position of Dr. Peck and the general 
teachings of Wesley, or any of the other standard 
writers of the Wesleyan school, f 

But secondly^ this new << standard of obedience," 
<'the expression of the Divine will" concerning us, 
<<fallen beings restored to a state of probation by the 
mediation of Christ," is '^he law of love," — as dis- 
tinguished from the << original law," which Dr. Peck 
tells us, was <' an expression of the Divine will, con- 
cerning beings perfectly pure." Now this ''law of 
love," by the explicit statement of the author, is 
nothing else than the requirement, "Thou shalt love 
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy 
soul, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thy- 

* See Sermon : The Properties of the Law and Gospel distin- 
guished, 

•j- Watson contrasts Wesley both with " those theologians 
who regard the death of Christ as making up the balance of 
human merit before God;" and also with " those who view 
the Gospel as a mitigated law, requiring, in order to salvation, 
a very low and imperfect obedience." — Observations on Southey's 
Life of Wesley, 



OF THE WESLEYAN SYSTEM. 85 

self." And we must here again say, that we have 
read Wesley's writings to little purpose, if in his 
general teachings, he anywhere allows, that love^ 
when thus made perfect, is any thing else than ^-'the 
fulfilling of the [original] law^ Indeed, the com- 
mand in question, he expressly tells us, is ''the royal 
law of heaven and earth," that ''it is not only the 
first and great command, but it is all the coimnand- 
ments hi one ;" and the love recognised in this re- 
quirement, he speaks of in the same discourse, as 
i'the sum of the perfect law.^''* Nor have the later 
Methodist writers presented any other view of this 
subject. In regard to this "law of love," Watson 
says, there is reason to believe, that it is substan- 
tially, and in its great principles, the same law under 
which all moral beings are placed ; and then, instead 
of suggesting that this law, " as incorporated in the 
gospel," sets up a "standard of obedience," differ- 
ing as much from that fixed by "the original law," as 
"fallen beings" differ from "beings perfectly pure," 
he concludes: "That the New Testament is a more 
perfect dispensation of the knowledge of the moral 
will of God than the old," and "that we have in the 
Gospel the most complete and perfect revelation of 
moral law ever given to men."t Dr. Clarke, speak- 
ing of this very law, "To love God with all the heart," 
&c., says: "This law, as it proceeded from the 
immaculate nature of God, was always the same. It 



* See Sermon : Tlu Circumcision of the Heart, 
\ Institutes, Vul. ii, pp. 5, 471,472. 
8 



86 OBJECTION TO DR. PECk's STATEMENT 

was the law giv en to our first parents, and was suited 
to the nature of man, who was created in the image 
of God;" and he concludes, that any law, lowering 
the standard of duty, after man had sinned, to a level 
with his sinful imperfection, << could be no expres- 
sion of the Divine mind."* Some of these quotations 
more at length, and others of similar import, have 
been given on pp. 43, 44; and they might be con- 
tinued to almost any extent. 

In view of what we deem an entire want of coin- 
cidence between these doctrines of Dr. Peck and the 
general system of theology promulgated by Wesley, 
we have inquired whether they might not have a 
higher and more authoritative origin. We have 
sought, but sought in vain, for evidence in the teach- 
ings of our Lord, that this << law of love," when re- 
peated by him, had any less significancy than w^hen 
given to beings perfectly pure. We have also sought, 
but in vain, for any thing in the provisions of the 
gospel which could indirectly affect this requirement, 
considered as a rule of life, or a " standard of duty." 
These considerations, all combined, have led us care- 
fully to review the statements of Dr. Peck ; and 
though w^e find this author admitting, in the same 
lecture from which our extracts are made, ''that the 
law^ of perfect purity remains — as a rule of duty bind- 
ing all moral beings, &c.," — the admission does not 
help us out of our difficulty. If, indeed, '« the law 
of perfect purity remains as a rule of duty" for us 

* Sermon : Life, the Gift of the Gospel, &c. 



OF THE WESLEYAN SYSTEM. 87 

<i fallen beings," we are utterly at a loss to explain, 
how it can be consistent with any other '^ standard 
of duty," or any other '' expression of the Divine will 
concerning fallen beings." — On the whole, we would 
much prefer to think that the difficulty arises entirely 
from some mental obtuseness on our part, or from 
some mere infelicity of expression on the part of the 
author ; but this w^e cannot do. The doctrines in 
question are stated with too much formality and dis- 
tinctness, and argued with too much care to admit 
either supposition. And again, circumstances lead 
us to refer the paternity of the theory in question to 
such isolated passages as the one we have quoted 
from Wesley ; and we doubt not but Dr. Peck, and 
many others after him, really believe these doctrines 
to be truly those of that eminent divine. 

We might leave it to the professed expositors of 
Wesley's system, to show how these passages are to 
be construed in accordance with its general provi- 
sions ; but will merely suggest, as furnishing a 
possible clue to the reconciHation, first, that Wesley 
has elsewhere most explicitly stated in what sense 
only it is, that we are under no other law than the 
law of faith. And it is <« as a condition ofi salvation,^ ^ 
and not as a standard of duty. We suggest, secondly^ 
that the term "law of love" is used by Wesley in a 
different sense from that in which it seems to be used 
by Dr. Peck. By it, Wesley does not always, nor 
generally, refer to any ''standard of duty," or "of 
obedience ;" but he employs it as a general term, 
embracing the provisions as well as the i^equirements 



88 OBJECTION TO DR. PECk's STATEMENT. 

of the gospel. And, what is entirely to the purpose 
we have in hand, so far as it is considered by him 
properly a law^ or a system of requirements, it is 
made to embrace the entire moral law, '' Christ," 
says he, '' has adopted every point of the moral law, 
and grafted it into the law of love." In the only 
place in which we have noticed this term, in the ex- 
tensive quotations made from Wesley, by Dr. Peck, 
it is used as entirely synonymous with " the law of 
faith." (See p. 274.) On this interpretation, the 
passage in question means only as though it read : 
'' It is well for us that we are not under the original 
dispensation which required perfect obedience as the 
condition of salvation ; but one, which, though it 
recognises the same standard of perfect obedience, 
yet admits of an application to the blood of atone- 
ment, in case of disobedience or failure." 

We presume there may be some who will not 
adopt our mode of reconciling the apparently con- 
flicting sentiments of Wesley. The author of these 
pages will fall out with no one on this account. 
There will still be found, as heretofore, men w^ho 
w^ill persist in declaring his sentiments irreconcilable; 
and some of those who do not, will endeavor to recon- 
cile them by other means. But one of the most na- 
tural and necessary inferences from the doctrines we 
have been examining, whether held by Wesley or 
not, is, that perfect obedience, ^^ according to the 
claims of the original law," is not only not " prac- 
ticable by man" under the gospel dispensation ; but 
is not even embraced in the " expression of the 



Divine will" concerning beings enjoying only the 
provisions purchased by the death of Christ ! 

Though we have not deemed it important to re- 
peat the psychological arguments which oppose them- 
selves to the doctrines we have just had under re- 
view, but have contented ourselves with simply prov- 
ing these doctrines discordant with what we deem 
the great principles of the Wesley an system ; we 
w^ould not be understood as claiming an identity 
between our views and those of Wesley on this en- 
tire subject. On the contrary, his contrast of the 
moral perfection recognised in the gospel system 
with the perfection of paradise, has no affinity with 
the principles we have laid down. This notion, as 
regards Wesleyan writers, we might call peculiarly 
his, but that Dr. Peck seems fully to agree with it ; 
and it might obviously arise either from his fixing 
a different standard of Christian perfection from 
that fixed by us, or from his entertaining a different 
idea of man's original condition. In the one case, 
the discrepancy between his views and ours w^ould 
be of vital importance ; in the other, it is a mere 
diversity of opinion in matters of speculation. And 
such only do we find it to be. Thus it is, that 
\thile the doctrine we have last examined leads 
directly and inevitably to conclusions essentially op- 
posed to the principles we have stated ; the practi- 
cal difference between Wesley's doctrines and ours 
are rather apparent than real. 

When treating of the work of sanctification ia 



90 

man's nature abstractly, we have already seen that 
Wesley places it precisely where Dr. Snodgrass and 
others agree with us in placing it. But to be more 
particular, the subject of this grace, according to 
him, first <« loves the Lord his God with all his heart, 
with all his soul, with all his mind, and with all 
his strength ;" and, then — <* as he loves God, so he 
< keeps his commandments ;' not only some, or most 
of them, but all, from the least to the greatest. He 
is not content to ' keep the whole law and offend in 
one point,' but he has in all points ' a conscience 
void of offence toward God and toward man.' What- 
ever God has forbidden, he avoids ; whatever God 
has enjoined, he does. < He runs in the way of 
God's commandments,' now He hath set his heart 
at liberty. It is his glory and joy so to do ; it is 
his daily crown of rejoicing, to ' do the will of God 
on earth, as it is done in heaven.' iVll the com- 
mandments of God he accordingly keeps, and that 
with all his might ; for his obedience is in propor- 
tion to his love, the source from whence it flows." 

Such is Wesley's absolute standard of Christian 
perfection. It is only when this standard is consi- 
dered relatively to the perfection of paradise, that his 
theory differs from ours ; and the origin of the dif- 
ference is discovered, when we find him, in one 
place, affirming of the understanding of Adam, that 
it was " clear as that of angels," so that " in virtue 
of this, he always judged right ;"* and in another, 



Sermon : On Perfection, 



OF ADAMIC PERFECTION. 91 

suggesting that all his knowledge was from intuition. 
<' Perhaps," says he, << he had no need of reasoning 
till his corruptible body pressed down his mind, and 
impaired its native faculties. Perhaps, till then, the 
mind saw every truth that offered as directly as the 
eye now sees the light." — It is easy to be seen, that, 
entertaining these view^s of man's original state, he 
might have some slight hesitation, at least, in admit- 
ting that we can keep a law adapted to that state ; 
especially, if, as he seems to have done, he conceived 
moral perfection to depend on that which is intellec- 
tual or physical. And it is at this point, precisely, 
that his speculative difficulties, to which we have be- 
fore barely made reference, seem to arise, and from 
this source they all flow. And speculative these dif- 
ficulties are, at least with him. In theory ^ he never 
calls Christian perfection "sinless ;" yet in practice^ 
it is <« salvation from sin ;" — in theory^ errors result- 
ing from unavoidable ignorance and weakness are 
« sins ;" yet jorac&r?-%, they are ^^ sins improperly 
so called," and the word sin '' is never taken in this 
sense in Scripture ;"* — theoretically, man can never, 
while he is in a corruptible body, attain to Adamic 
perfection f yet practically, he can " keep all the 
commandments of God, from the least to the great- 
est ;" — theoretically, he cannot attain to angelic per- 
fection ;* yet practically and experimentally, " it is 
his daily crown of rejoicing, to do the will of God on 
earth, as it is done [by angels] in heaven." Indeed, 

• Sermon: On Perfedioii, See, also, Plain Account, &c. 



92 Wesley's theory of adamic perfection : 

it is only in theory thdit ''the understanding of Adam 
was clear as Ihat of the angels" — that '' he always 
judged right," &c.; in practice '< he might mistake 
evil for good : he was not infallible ;" and Eve was 
actually " deceived," prior to the falL^ — It is scarcely 
necessary to remark, that these visionary views of 
the exalted powers of Adam are not generally held 
by the modern defenders of the Wesleyan system, 
though they may be by Dr. Peck. And many of the 
most intelligent among them, and some even of the 
most learned and cautious of their writers, have with 
these views laid altogether aside the idea that man, 
when ''entirely renewed in the love and image of 
God," cannot keep His perfect law.f 



* Sermon : The End of Chrisfs Coming, 

•\ Since this chapter was prepared for the press, we have 
seen this same subject still farther argued by Dr. Peck in the 
Meth, Quarterly Review. (See No. for Jan., 1847, Art. viii.) 
This leaves us still where his book left us ; only with an 
increased conviction, that the Dr. has fixed his mind on a 
mere speculation of Wesley's, apparently considering it as 
the very corner and top-stone of his system of theology. — 
<< Could we," says he, " suppose a man at any time in a con- 
dition to fulfil the righteousness of the law, we would scarcely 
suppose him any longer to stand in need of the atonement." 
— P. 132. Wesley could never have said this. On the con- 
trary, he supposes this same objection made to his oivn sys- 
tem, in the inquiry: — "If they [sanctified Christians] live 
without sin, does not this exclude the necessity of a Mediator] 
At least, is it not plain that they stand no longer in need of 
C ifist in his priestly office 1" — He does not reply to this, by 
bayiug that Christians do mi "live without sin;" nor in any 



HIS THEORY OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 93 

As some of our readers may wish additional light, 
as to what appear to have been the views of Wesley 
on our general subject, and the exact relation which 
our view bears to his ; we will dwell on the point a 
moment longer. — In the conclusion of his sermon on 
The Fall of Man ^ Wesley says: <'It should be par- 
ticularly observed, that ' where sin abounded, grace 
does much more abound.' For 'not as the con- 



other way give prominence to the peculiar dogma of Dr. Peck. 
He refers to it only in the most qualified terms, and rather as 
a troublesome appendage to his system than as a constituent 
part of it; and Fletcher, answering the same objection, in his 
reply to Mr. Hill, makes no reference to it at all. (See Last 
Check, Sec. xiii.) We invite special attention to this argu- 
ment of Fletcher. He says, — " None make so much use of 
Christ's blood as perfect Christians," — not however as a 
<' medicine," but as " the Divine preservative which keeps off 
the infection of sin." In his further remarks on this subject, 
he illustrates it by a reference to the sinlessness of the saints in 
heaA'en, where he says : " Are not the saints before the throne 
perfectly sinless 1 And who are more ready than they to extol 
the blood, and sing the song of the Lamb : ' To him that loved 
us, and washed us from our sins in his blood, be glory,' &c. 1 
If an angel preached to them from the modern gospel, and 
desired them to plead for the remains of sin, lest they should 
lose their peculiar value for the atoning blood; would not they 
all suspect him to be an angel of darkness, transforming him- 
self into an angel of light? And shall we be the dupes of the 
tempter, who deceives good men, that they may deceive us by 
a similar argument 1" — We should suppose that Dr. Peck, 
claiming to hold the Wesleyan doctrine on this subject, would 
hardly like the category in which he must perceive himself 
here placed, by urging the objection we have just quoted. 



94 

demnation, so is the free gift,' but we may gain infi- 
nitely more than we have lost. We may now attain 
both higher degrees of holiness, and higher degrees 
of glory than it would otherwise have been possible 
for us to attain." — The '<> involuntary transgressions 
of the Divine law," which he supposes to be '< inse- 
parable from mortality," do not arise, then, in his 
estimation, from any defect, or incapacity of improve- 
ment in the moral powers ; since men may now 
even "attain higher degrees of holiness" than could 
have been attained but for the fall. We introduce 
this extract to prove no position of our own ; but 
simply to show, that according to his view, these 
violations of the law of perfect purity, from which 
the holiest men are not free, arise solely from a sup- 
posed vast inferiority in our physical and intellectual 
powers, as compared with those of Adam ; while it 
is admitted that our moral powers may be fully re- 
stored — while, in this respect^ it is admitted, we may 
even gain infinitely more than we have lost. Those, 
therefore, who, on the authority of Wesley, adopt 
this theory — of transgressions of the Divine law not 
inconsistent with the perfection of the Christian cha- 
racter, — have, firsts to admit the fact of our fancied 
physical and intellectual inferiority when compared 
with Adam, for on this alone it rests ; and, second^ 
they must admit the conclusion from this as a pre- 
mise, that even though our moral powers may now 
be no| less fully, nay, even though they may be more 
fully developed, than would have been those of un- 
fallen man, yet because of our decaying bodies and 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 95 

our feeble intellects^ we must therefore be perpetual 
transgressors of the Divine law. — At this point we 
shall pause, only very briefly, to show, that, as to the 
fact in question, it has not been recognised by Me- 
thodist writers as any part of their creed, or as being 
of any iraportance in their system ; and, as to the con-- 
elusion^ that it is far from being universally admitted. 
Watson, the only writer of this class, so far as ^e 
know, who has attempted to set forth with any con- 
siderable minuteness the nature of Adamic perfec- 
tion, simply remarks, in regard to the hody^ '< it is 
not necessary to take up any large space to prove, 
that in no sense can that bear the image of God.'' 
In relation to the intellect^ he says only, — '<• He 
[Adam] was capable of knowledge, and he was en- 
dowed with Hberty of will."* These claims con- 
trast singularly indeed with those of Wesley ; and 
yet here are briefly expressed the views of the most 
learned and critical divines. f 

* Institutes: See the whole of Part ii, Chap, xviii. 

■|- Knapp, Professor of Theology, in the University of Halle, 
supposes that our first parents acquired all their ordinary- 
knowledge in the same manner that we do. " They must first 
be instructed," says he, " by what is sensible ; and have 
every thing rendered as obvious to the senses as possible ; 
exactly as it is represented, Gen. ii, 19, 20. If the repre- 
sentation there made were different, and such as many mo- 
dern scholars wouJd have us believe, it would be highly im- 
probable, and the whole narrative would become suspicious. 
This very simplicity gives it the stamp of internal truth. — 
Our first parents are represented in Chap, iii, as in fact cre- 
dulous, and easily beguiled. And how can this be reconciled 



96 Wesley's theory 

As to the other point referred to, several Wesleyan 
writers have been very explicit. Dr. Clarke, speak- 
ing of Christian perfection, says : — <' This perfection 
is the restoration of man to the state of holiness from 
which he fell, by creating him anew in Christ Jesus, 
and restoring to him that image and likeness of God 
which he has lost. A higher meaning than this it 
cannot have ; a lower meaning it must not have. 
God made man in that degree of perfection which 
was pleasing to his infinite wisdom and goodness. 

with the supposition that they possessed that deep and exten- 
sive knowledge, and those great perfections sometimes as- 
cribed to them ] The knowledge of Adam, then, cannot be com- 
pared with that of any advanced and mature race of men." 
" The understanding of man, also, in his primitive state, though 
indeed sufficient for the situation in which he was placed, 
was still ver)^ small, as his actual knowledge was very limited. 
But the more feeble and imperfect these are, the more imper- 
fect, necessarily, must be that virtue which depends upon 
them. There is a great difference between the innocence of 
childhood, and the virtue which is grounded upon the more 
perfect and mature knowledge and experience of a riper and 
more advanced age. If our first parents had possessed so 
preponderating a bias to good as many have supposed, it is 
hard to see how they could have been so easily seduced. We 
behold them yielding to temptations which would have in 
vain assailed many of those among their descendants, in 
whom, according to the language of Scripture, the image of 
God is renewed." — Lec'ures on Christian Theology, Sec. liv. 

Dr. South says : — " The light of man's understanding, while 
innocent, was clear indeed, but small and diminutive, subject 
to the clouds of fallacy and inadvertency." — Posthumous Ser- 
monSfXxv: London, 1843. 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 97 

Sin defaced this Divine image ; Jesus came to restore 
it. Sin must have no triumph ; and the Redeemer 
of mankind must have his glory." — '^ The whole 
design of God was to restore man to his image, and 
raise him from the ruins of his fall, — a less salvation 
than this would be dishonorable to the sacrifice of 
Christ, and the operation of the Holy Ghost ; and 
would be as unworthy of the appellation of ' Chris- 
tianity,' as it would be of that of 'holiness,' or < per- 
fection.' " 

This passage is found even in the work of Dr. Peck, 
pp. 70, 72 ; but such a form of expression is not 
with this learned divine and commentator merely an 
incidental matter. Subsequently, in the same essay, 
speaking of the perfection required in the Bible, and 
attainable by Christians, he says : — '^ This is the 
state in which man was created ; for he was made 
in the image and Hkeness of God. This is the state 
from which man fell ; for he broke the command of 
God. And this is the state into which every human 
soul must be raised who would dwell with God in 
glory ; for Christ was incarnated, and died to put 
away sin by the sacrifice of himself." And again, 
— " The object of all God's promises and dispensa- 
tions was to bring fallen man back to the image of 
God, which he had lost. This, indeed, is the sum 
and substance of the religion of Christ." In com- 
menting on Eph. iv, 24, he says : — " It is not this or 
the other degree of moral good which the soul is to 
receive by Jesus Christ ; it is the whole image of 
God ; and is to be formed xara ©foj/, according to 

9 



98 Wesley's theory 

God; the likeness of the Divine Being is to be 
traced upon his soul ; and he is to bear that as fully 
as his first father, Adam, bore it in the begin- 
ning." 

He is still more explicit, if possible, in one of his 
sermons, where he says : — «< Again, as by diabolical 
influence the soul is rendered guilty and impure^ and 
thus divested of the image of God, in which it was 
created ; it is essential to the honor of Jesus Christ 
and the scheme of redemption, that the soul be 
brought back to the state in which it was created ; 
that sin and Satan may not only have no triumph, 
but that they may be destroyed and eternally con- 
founded. Any thing less than this could not have 
entered into the Divine purpose ; for, as man in the 
beginning had no more holiness and perfection than 
was suitable to, and necessary for the nature of his 
being, and the end for which he was formed ; so, if 
he be redeemed at all, and saved, he must be brought 
back into the same state of holiness in which he ori- 
ginally stood ; without which, God's design in his 
creation cannot be fulfilled. Further, — as the law 
of God was written upon his heart, but became obli- 
terated by sin, it is essentially necessary that it be 
again written on the soul ; and as the law, in his 
fallen state, could not be brought down in its purity, 
spirituality, and demands, to the sinful and imperfect 
state into which he had fallen, — so it was necessary, 
in redemption, to bring the soul up to the law ; and 
this is done by this purifying energy. And thus the 
redeemed of the Lord are enabled to love the Lord 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 99 

their God, with all their heart, soul, mind, and 
strength ; < the very thoughts of their hearts being 
cleansed by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, so 
that they are enabled perfectly to love Him, and wor- 
thily to magnify His name.' "* 

In strict accordance with this view, Watson replies 
to the question — « but if man has fallen, can he rise 
again ?" as follows : — <« Of restoration, indeed, all 
men have had some hope. The most of them, how- 
ever, looked not for this till the soul should be dis- 
charged from matter, which they considered as ne- 
cessarily evil. Others have expected it in this life, 
but only in a very low and imperfect degree. The 
gospel alone places this glorious possibility full be- 
fore us. — The seat of sin is in the soul, not the body ; 
and the soul shall be renewed in righteousness. Nor 
is it a low and partial attainment to which we are 
called. It is to be a redemption worthy of the price 
which purchased it ; a work worthy of its great 
agent, God ; a new creation ; an elevation, not to 
any standard found in man himself, but to one far 
above him. The promises were given that we might 
be partakers of the Divine nature. So it was at first. 
Man was created in the image of God. And so it 
shall be again. Man shall be renewed in the image 
of Him that created him, in righteousness and true 

holiness."! 

Now, on every principle of correct interpretation, 

* Sermon : Life, the Gift of the Gospel. 

■j- Sermon : The Design of the Promises of God, 



100 Wesley's theory 

it seems to us that these passages must mean — that 
the man whose soul is thus renewed in the image of 
God, by the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, 
though he may still have his corruptible body, yet 
can keep the same law which Adam kept in his state 
of original purity. — '' The seat of sin is in the soul^ 
not the body.'^^ Dr. Clarke, however, becomes his 
own interpreter, in the unequivocal declaration, that 
" he who receives salvation by faith, receives at the 
same time power from God to live in obedience to 
every moral precept.''* 

But Dr. Fisk, so far as the authority of a single 
master-writer in the theological school to which he 
belonged could do it, has removed all doubt from 
this question. '^ The law," he says expressly, " is a 
rule of life for the holy ;" and the only reason he 
deems it important to assign for this, is — '< its ori- 
ginal reference to man as he came forth from the 
hands of his Maker." But he presents us with the 
whole system. << The law," he repeats, " is a rule 
of life for the holy ;" and proceeds, — << but as the 
whole human family have fallen from holiness, they 
are all by nature children of wrath, and, unassisted, 
must perish without hope. What then can be done ? 
Shall the law be changed ? It was perfect at the 
first, and any change would make it imperfect. A 
less perfect law God could not prescribe. But the 
sinner, as we have already seen, cannot keep this 
law." i'The gospel^^^ however, he adds, << has made 

* Sermon : Salvation by Faith, &c. 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 101 

provision that the righteousness of the law 
MIGHT BE FULFILLED IN US. This is an important 
saying, and worthy of all acceptation. The law of 
the SpiHt of life is given, not that the law might be 
repealed, not that its claims should be lowered 
down, or its requisitions dispensed with ; but that 
its righteousness might be fulfilled in us, by a holi- 
ness of walk after the spirit and not after the flesh. 
Let him that readeth understand. The gospel em- 
braces in its extensive provisions, all the righteous- 
ness of the law ; and points out a practicable way on 
new and feasible conditions, by which its precepts 
can be kept." This " practicable way" of keeping 
the precepts of the law is discovered by Dr. F. in 
the power and efficiency of <' gospel grace through 
Christ, that constitutes fallen man a free moral agent, 
and restores to him the power of choice, which he 
lost through sin, and thus lays the foundation for all 
the commands, invitations, and directions that are 
given to the sinner. Whatever sinners, therefore, 
are required to do, the gospel furnishes them with 
ability, and with all necessary helps, to perform." 
— " That the soul, when made a partaker of this 
grace, through faith, is prepared, by this change, to 
keep the law," he concludes, " is evident ; because 
the very design is, that the righteousness of the laiv 
might be fulfilled in W5." This prepares the way for 
the final conclusion, which is mainly to our purpose, 
that << the law is suited not only as a rule of conduct^ 
but as a condition of life for the holy ;" while he 
adds " the gospel is designed as a provision of life 

0* 



102 

for the unholy."* So far as these can be consi- 
dered true exponents of the Wesleyan system of 
Christian perfection, this system differs not from that 
which we have set forth in the preceding chapters. 

Those who beUeve that Wesley himself taught, as 
a part of his settled theological creed, a perfection 
which embraces less than '<the righteousness of the 
law," will find it difficult to understand him, when 
he makes holiness equivalent with universal obedience^ 
and speaks of this obedience as the offspring of faith, 
and as its co-equal in constituting '' the ordinary 
condition of salvation ;" or when he denies that 
<< men were once more obliged to obey God or to 
work the works of the law than they are now," and 
insists on '' the same degree of obedience" as well 
as ^' the same measure of holiness" under the cove- 
nant of grace as under the covenant of works. f 

* Sermon : Properties of the Law and Gospel distinguished, 
■f "With regard to the condition of salvation, it may be re- 
membered, that I allow, not only faith, but likewise holiness 
or universal obedience, to be the ordinary condition of final 
salvation ; and that, when I say Faith alone is the condition 
of present salvation, what I would assert is this : — (1.) That 
without faith no man can be saved from his sins ; can be 
either inwardly or outwardly holy. And, (2.) That at what 
time soever faith is given, holiness commences in the soul. 
For that instant * the love of God,' (which is the source of 
holiness,) * is shed abroad in the heart.*" — Works: Vol. v, 
p. 50. 

*' The case is not, therefore, as you suppose, that men were 
once more obliged to obey God, or to work the works of his 
law, than they are naiv. This is a supposition you cannot 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 103 

Again, when such writers as Dr. Wardlaw speak of 
the gospel as '' bringing back man's sinful nature to 
spiritual conformity with the great principles of the 
law;^^ and assert, that, by effecting this, "it restores 
him at once to the purityy the glory^ and the felicity 
of his original nature ;^^ — those who interpret Wes- 
ley's system thus, are left with the single alternative 
of admitting that the perfection which he taught is 
lower than that taught all along by other eminent 
evangelical writers, or else that they themselves have 
misunderstood his teachings. 

That we do not express ourselves in the same lan- 
guage which Wesley employed, may of itself lead 
some to suspect a difference between his system and 
that which we present. — Such would do well to re- 
collect, Jirst^ that since Wesley lived and wrote, 
great changes have been made in the language of 

make good. But we should have been obliged, if we had been 
under the covenant of works, to have done those things ante- 
cedent to our acceptance. Whereas, now, all good works, 
though as necessary as ever, are not antecedent to our accept- 
ance, but consequent upon it. Therefore, the nature of the 
covenant of grace gives you no ground, no encouragement at 
all, to set aside any instance or degree of obedience, any part 
or measure of holiness." — Sermon : The Law Established by 
Faith, 

And how truly like our system does it sound, when Fletcher, 
one of the best expounders of Wesley's system, says: <<We 
point sinners to that Saviour, in and from whom they may 
continually have the law-fvlfilling power, ' that the righteousness 
of the law may be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, 
but after the Spirit.' " — Second Check j Letter iii. 



104 

theology and metaphysics ; and, secondly^ that so 
long as he did live, he continued not only to perfect 
his theological theories, but also to vary his mode of 
setting them forth. Less capacious minds often ste- 
reotype their opinions ; or, in the absence of any 
opinions of their own, learn certain formulas of speech 
by rote, and consider all else error. Such may be 
very good men ; but they are, to say the least, very 
i^oor followers of Wesley. 

To the question — whether w^e in fact agree with 
the settled doctrines of such a man as Wesley, we 
are not indifferent. Whether we shall he thought to 
agree with him concerns us much less ; and still less 
are we concerned that all our speculative views 
should be like his. We might as well w^ish that our 
faces had been made alike. The doctrine, however, 
that renew^ed and sanctified man must live in perpe- 
tual transgression of God's law, considered in all its 
bearings, cannot be thought a matter of mere specu- 
lation. And the view of this subject which we have 
taken, whether it be acknowledged to be Wesleyan 
or not, we believe will present few difficulties to the 
minds of any except such as have formed some ro- 
mantic ideas of the physical and intellectual perfec- 
tions of our first parents. For such, there is another 
aspect of this subject, perfectly accordant with that 
which we have presented. And we will introduce 
the reader to it, by asking — What is that element in 
the law under which men are now placed — call it 
by what name w^e will — which adapts it to all its 
subjects } What is it which adapts it equally to the 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 105 

intellect of a Pascal or a Sir William Jones, and to 
that of the obscure Christian in the humblest walks 
of life ? It is the element expressed by the word 
just. The Psalmist pronounced the law holy^ yet at 
the same time just and good. The justice of this 
law consists in its entire adaptation to the circum- 
stances of every individual who is under it ; and 
what we w4sh to remark, is — that the same principle 
which suits the law to the varying circumstances of 
individuals, at the same time renders all change in 
the Divine law, considered as a rule of life, entirely 
unnecessary, and obviously removes from the holy 
man all necessity of violating it, whatever may be 
the weakness of his mental or physical powers. 
This conclusion seems to us irresistible. Wesley 
himself says : — <^ God gave this free intelligent crea- 
ture [man in paradise] the same law as to his first- 
born children, [the angels]." This same law, too, 
he <'has promised to write afresh on the hearts of 
all true believers."* Could man in paradise keep 
inviolate the law, which had been adapted to the ex- 
alted nature of angels ? then, on the same principle, 
can holy men, under the new dispensation, of every 
grade of intellect, and of every varying degree of phy- 
sical power or weakness, keep that law inviolate. 
And all this is — because this law is just^ and not a 
system of statutes, requiring of angels and of men — 
of a Paul and of a Lazarus, the exercise of any given 
amount oi intellectual and physical power ; but only 

* Sermon : Originalj Properties^ Nature, and Use of the Law, 



106 Wesley's theory 

requiring moral perfection, which could be as com- 
plete in a Lazarus as in a Paul — in man as in the 
angels. 

Wesley has as clearly recognised this element in 
the Divine law, as we have done. It is after using 
the expressions to which we have just referred, and 
after pronouncing the law of God — thus given in 
common to angels and to men — << a copy of the eter- 
nal mind, a transcript of the Divine nature," that he 
says of it, as partially quoted before, — "It is adapted, 
in all respects, to the nature of things ; of the whole 
universe, and every individual. It is suited to all 
the circumstances of each, and to all their mutual 
relations, whether such as have existed from the be- 
ginning, or such as commenced in any following pe- 
riod. It is exactly agreeable to the fitness of things, 
whether essential or accidental." — From these pre- 
mises, it appears to us an inexplicable mystery, how 
a mind of the logical acumen of a Wesley could 
ever yield even to a speculative doubt, as to the 
ability of the holy man, under the gospel dispensation, 
to keep this law, and thus to keep all the command- 
ments of God. «' If you love me," said our Saviour, 
i' keep my commandments ;^^ and, ''He that keepeth 
my commandments^ he it is that loveth me." John 
xiv, 15, 21. 

But Wesley, it must be admitted, had speculative 
doubts on this subject ; and in theory, at least, be- 
lieved, that the infirmities — the mere objective acts, 
arising in the holiest men from necessary ignorance 
and from '< the corruptible state of the body," are 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 107 

" sins," in such a sense that whether <« known or 
unknown they need the atoning blood." — With- 
out stopping at this point to discuss the abstract 
question here involved, w^e simply remark, that if 
this proposition is true, then the atonement required 
in such cases must either be applied in consequence 
of repentance and faith on the part of the trans- 
gressor, or it must be applied unconditionally. Now, 
in regard to the first of these suppositions, every 
principle of philosophy pronounces it absurd, that a 
man can repent of any act which is the result of pure 
ignorance, so long as he remains in his ignorance. 
Here, then, is one class of these " transgressions" or 
'' sins," expressly recognised by Wesley, of which, 
from the very nature of the case, we cannot repent. 
Nor less absurd is it, to suppose that we can repent 
of any result of our necessary ignorance, or of any 
mental or physical weakness or incapacity — even 
though such results may afterwards come to our 
knowledge. Much as we may regret that w^e can- 
not always judge right, or that we have not natural 
mental capacities equal to others, or that our bo- 
dily infirmities should ever weigh down our spirits, 
or compel us to retire from the active service of 
God, we cannot repent of such things. Yet of such 
as these, Wesley says : — <•' They are deviations from 
the perfect law, and need an atonement." It fol- 
lows, then, that the atonement must, in such cases, 
be applied unconditionally^ or, at least, not on con- 
dition of repentance. And it must be observed, too, 
in what sense such transgressors of the Divine law 



108 

need the atonement of Christ. << They do not need 
him," says Wesley, «<to reconcile them to God 
afresh, for they are reconciled. They do not need 
him to restore the favor of God, but to continue it. 
He does not procure pardon for them anew, but 
<ever liveth to make intercession for them.' " 

This hypothesis, it must at least be admitted, in- 
troduces us to a very peculiar class of sins — sins, 
which involve neither repentance on the part of him 
who commits them, nor any specific act of pardon 
on the part of the Divine Lawgiver, nor any penalty 
to be inflicted as the consequence of the transgres- 
sion. — When Dr. Fisk was just closing his masterly 
discussion concerning the Law and the Gospel, in 
the sermon recently referred to, he exclaims em- 
phatically : — '' Here is no unconditional atonementy 
no merciful law, no small and unimportant sins." 
This theory of unconditional atonement for what 
even Wesley sometimes calls '^ actual transgres- 
sions" — a theory which can by possibility suggest 
the idea of << small and unimportant sins," will be 
received by many with hesitation ; and especially 
when the logical mind of a Fisk could conclude, that 
such a system '^ lays the foundation for Antinomian- 
ism and licentiousness in relation to a law for which 
atonement was [thus] made." On this precise ground, 
Wesley himself shrinks back from calling these '« ac- 
tual transgressions" sins ; though he tacitly admits 
that such they roust be if they require an atonement, 
since Christ << is the atonement for nothing but sin." 
«' I am much afraid," says he, ^^ if we should allow 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 109 

any sins to be consistent with perfection, few would 
confine the idea to those defects, concerning which 
only the assertion could be true." He is afraid that 
others will confound in practice \yhat he confounds 
only in theory — the subjective and moral, with the 
merely objective and physical. 

We shall close our already protracted discussion 
of the Wesleyan system, by suggesting to its friends 
an appeal from the speculations of Wesley to the 
principles which his grand system of theology em- 
braces ; and, as a last resort, from both these to the 
Scriptures, which are the only sufficient rule both of 
our faith and practice. — Where, in the moral law or 
in the gospel, is it taught, that either physical infirm- 
ities, or mental weaknesses, or any of their proper 
consequences, are sins ! — Where is it taught, either 
that they are transgressions of the law, or that they 
require an atonement ! 



10 



110 THE OBERLIN SYSTEM 



CHAPTER Vin. 

The Oberlin System of Christian Perfection compared with 
the Principles of the former Sections of this Book — Chris- 
tian Perfection considered particularly :— First, with refer- 
ence to fallen Man's " weak powers" — Secondy as " perma- 
nent" or "perpetual" — Third, in its connection with the 
Doctrine of " Natural Ability." 

If we now turn to the work of President Maban 
on Christian Perfection,* we find that his views coin- 
cide with ours in two or three most vital points. — 
Fii'st, he makes the perfection of the Christian cha- 
racter to consist in perfect love to God and our 
neighbor ; and then considers this as implying a 
« full and perfect discharge of our entire duty — of 
all existing obligations in respect to God, and all 
other beings." <' It is," says he, <' perfect obedi- 
ence to the moral law." Pp. 9, 10. — Second^ he 
does not consider the possession of this grace en- 
tirely to exclude '< feelings" and <' desires," which 
under existing circumstances it would be improper^ 
or unlawful to indulge ; but only to require that every 
improper feehng, and every unlawful desire, be in- 
stantly suppressed, and that all our mental suscepti- 

* Scripture Doctrine of Chnstian Perfection, 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. Ill 

bilities be held in perfect subjection to the truth and 
will of God, as apprehended by an enlightened in- 
tellect. Pp. 15, 16. This is all that we have 
claimed for our first parents, and consequently all 
we claim for the man who is renewed by grace. 
Thirds he represents holiness as progressive ; and 
this progress as depending on the development of 
our mental powers, and the extent and distinctness 
of our vision of Divine truth. 

When, however, this writer says of the Christian, 
— " His holiness may be perfect in kind^ but finite 
in degree, and in this sense imperfect ; because his 
wisdom and knowledge are limited, and in this 
sense imperfect ;" and in immediate connection 
remarks, — " Here our powers are comparatively 
weak," there seems to be some recognition of a sort 
of imperfect holiness unknown to the system we pre- 
sent. When it is said, — " Here our powers are 
comparatively weak," we wish to inquire of what 
powers the author speaks. — Our objection may lie 
entirely against the form of expression ; and yet we 
see no reason for his referring, in this connection, to 
any '' powers" but such as are essential to the moral 
perfection of man. If he refers merely to physical 
or intellectual powers, they may be " comparatively 
weak ;" but our system replies, that the image and 
likeness of God, which are renewed in the sanctified 
human heart, are entirely irrespective of them. We 
have never thought that the beggary or the sores of 
Lazarus were any impediment in the way of his en- 
tire sanctification ; or that the receiving of but five 



112 THE OBERLIN SYSTEM 

talents, or only one, instead of ten, proved any moral 
defect. If these are the powers which are pro- 
nounced w^eak, and whose weakness is considered 
sufficient to constitute the holiness of the Christian 
"imperfect," in any sense; then, it seems to us, 
that the view which we have controverted in the last 
section, w-hich makes even the holy man a necessary 
transgressor of the Divine law, is more consistent 
than that here set forth, which teaches that this <' im- 
perfect" holiness " implies a full and perfect dis- 
charge of our entire duty" — that '< it is perfect obe- 
dience to the moral law." Surely there can be no 
weakness in the powers which are essential to a per- 
fection measured by the requirements of God's holy 
law. 

The moral powers alone we believe essential to 
such a perfection ; and, in the sanctified man, they 
are, in no important sense, weak. It is true, as re- 
gards the entire man, he is capable of indefinite ex- 
pansion and growth. Adam, doubtless, possessed 
this capability : and it was from the possession of 
this same capability on the part of the youthful Jesus, 
that as he " increased in wisdom and stature," he also 
increased "in favor with God and man." Indeed, 
so far as this can be considered a ground of " imper- 
fection" in our holiness, we rejoice to believe that it 
will go with us far into the future ages of our exist- 
ence. Yet, in this sense only can the moral powers 
be weak in him who is renewed after the image of 
God. If w^e abstract from the constituents of the en- 
tire man the single element of moral perfection, — as 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. 113 

we believe it to have been mature in Adam, who was 
created in the image of God, so we believe it to 
reach its maturity in man whenever he is renewed 
in this image ; whether such renewal can take place, 
as we believe, in this life, or, as some think, only in 
the life to come. Maturity in this single principle, 
according to our system, constitutes Christian per- 
fection ; and consequently there are properly no de- 
grees in that entire sanctification of which we speak. 
It is thus, that, as regards every essential element of 
moral perfection, man, under the Christian dispensa- 
tion, despite of physical and of intellectual weakness, 
can become as perfect as Adam was ; and it is only 
thus, that he could be required to be <' perfect, even 
as his Father which is in heaven is perfect," or 
^f- worthily to magnify His holy name." These re- 
quisitions are made of him, and why may he not per- 
form them, if indeed he bears the '' image and like- 
ness" of his heavenly Father ? 

Though the moral purity thus required of us is 
absolute, many of its consequences are admitted to 
be relative. So we believe it to be understood, at 
least by many well informed Christians. ''0, to 
be holy as God is holy," says Dr. Payson, ''this is 
to be happy, according to our measure^ as God is 
happy." It is nowhere intimated, that absolute per- 
fection in happiness, or in knowledge, or in the con- 
ceptions we form of the Divine character, is attaina- 
ble ; while absolute moral perfection is demanded of 
us. This, then, may be perfect^ though all those 
are '< imperfect." 

10* 



114 THE OBERLIN SYSTEM 

The terms "permanent" and << perpetual," as 
applied by this writer to the holiness which is attaina- 
ble by the Christian, may be construed as meaning, 
either that this holiness, when attained, may be pre- 
served by a constant exercise of the same faith by 
w^hich it is procured ; or, that when attained it can- 
not be lost. We should understand him in the 
former sense, but that one professing to be an expo- 
sitor of the Oberlin theory tells us : — << Those bre- 
thren [the Oberlin divines] do not affirm that be- 
lievers are permanently sanctified during this life. 
They do not regard this as a question important to 
settle."* In the sense in which we would incline 
to understand them, this surely cannot be considered 
an unimportant question ; in the other sense, our psy- 
chological view decides at once against it, and leaves 
them to rest its support entirely on the Scriptures. 
With these exceptions, apparently slight, and yet 
of vast importance when considered in all their 
bearings and relations, we find very little disagree- 
ment between the practical views of this author and 
our own. 

In passing, we ought to allude to the fact, that the 
doctrine of "natural ability" is held by the theolo- 
gians at Oberlin ; though it is more distinctly avowed 
by one of the associates of President Mahan, than 
we have seen it by himself. We understand Pro- 



* Oberlin Evangelist, See also Christ, Ad, and Journal for 
June 4, 1845. 



OF CHRISTIAN PERFECTION. Il5 

fessor Finney to use this phrase, natural ability^ in 
the sense in which it is defined by the old theolo- 
gians : — Quae naturaliter propagantur, naturalia sunt.* 
Were we obliged, then, to give a name to the ability 
which our view opposes to this, we would rather 
call it supernatural than '< gracious," — supernatural 
in Adam and in all his intelligent offspring, since 
the fall, but originally natural in him. We may 
remark, however, in the language of Knapp, that 
the ability, supposed to be derived from the media- 
tion of Christ, is called gracious by those who use 
this term,^ — " not that it would have been consistent 
for God to desert the human race, and leave it to 
perish ; the Divine goodness forbids such a supposi- 
tion. The simple meaning is, that no external neces- 
sity compelled him to it, and that it is his free grace, 
without any desert or worthiness on the part of men." t 
Dr. Pond, though admitting that men have a " proper 
natural ability ^'^'^ perfectly to obey the law, so that 
perfection is metaphysically attainable^ yet denies that 
it has ever been actually attained.^ It would seem, 
therefore, that there is no necessary connection be- 
tween the doctrine of man's natural ability and the 
practical doctrine of Christian perfection. This may 
be held or rejected, in common, by those who believe 

* That ability is natural, which is propagated by regular 
course of generation. 

■f Christian Theology, sec. Ixxxviii. This definition of the 
terms gracious ability is of itself a refutation of most of the 
arguments which have been urged against the doctrine. 

4: See Biblical Repository for Jan. 1839. 



116 THE OBERLIN SYSTEM. 

and those who deny that doctrine. Indeed, the pe- 
culiar sentiments of Professor Finney scarcely seem 
to modify his views in respect either to the attaina- 
bleness of Christian perfection, or the standard of 
religious character which it implies. These points 
being made to rest directly on the testimony of the 
Scriptures, are determined by him as we have deter- 
mined them. 

The system in question, however, in another re- 
spect, involves this singular discrepancy with our 
views, — that it makes the exercise of supreme love 
to God not to depend on the conscious possession of 
God's favor, but on the will of the individual, which 
will he has the powder at all times to put forth in acts 
of supreme affection, notwithstanding the combined 
effects of the fall and of^ actual transgression.* 

* ^r^p the OberU7i Evangelist, Vol. iv, No. 18, Aug. 31, 1842. 



117 



CHAPTER IX. 

The Doctrine, that the Entire Sanctification of Man's Nature 
is practically attainable in this Life, still further consi- 
dered. — Some of the Peculiar Views of Dr. Upham's Lite- 
rior or Hidden Life examined : — First, The distinction between 
Infirmities and Sins — Second, The Nature of the Tempta- 
tions of the Sanctified Christian — Third, The Nature of the 
Temptations of our Saviour. 

We have studied the writings of Dr. Upham on 
the subject of Christian perfection, with great plea- 
sure. We admire the spirit which pervades the 
work, whose title w^e have placed at the head of this 
chapter; and have become more and more impressed 
with the belief, that it is destined to be greatly use- 
ful in the promotion of practical piety in the church 
and in the w^orld. We do not hesitate to say, that 
we have imbibed, from the examination of the work, 
a feeling of reluctance to throw any portion of it 
into the crucible of philosophic analysis ; and yet we 
have supposed the cause of truth might require it. 

Few modern works on the subject of Christian 
perfection have been more deservedly popular than 
tlie Interior or Hidden Life; and few perhaps are 
more extensively read. This circumstance only 
renders it the more important, that every doctrine it 
teaches should be coincident with the truth ; while 
it must be admitted, that the position which the 



118 INFIRMITIES AND SINS. 

author of the work occupies, and has long occupied, 
in the church, is not the most favorable to strict 
accuracy of view on such a subject, — so apt are men 
to interpret even their experience by their precon- 
ceived theories. Among those who do not deem the 
work faultless, the wonder has all along been, that a 
work on Christian perfection, of such distinguished 
excellence, should emanate from the midst of the 
Congregational church — from the midst of conflicting 
speculations about what too few of their wTiters have 
heretofore seemed to think of any practical import- 
ance. 

To proceed at once to our work, we find Dr. 
Upham, at the outset, taking the positions, that — 
<^God is to be regarded as righteous in exacting 
from us whatever we could or might have rendered 
him, if Adam had not fallen, and if the race had re- 
mained holy," p. 28 ; but that — <' he who loves God 
wdth his whole heart, and his neighbor as himself, is, 
in the gospel-sense of the terms, a holy or sanctified 
man," p. 30. He, who thus loves God, then, is 
holy only '' in the gospel-sense of the term ;" and 
this is accompanied by other qualifying remarks, 
which seem to imply, that the moral perfection which 
consists in perfect love to God and our neighbor is 
something less than it would have been, had Adam 
not fallen, and had the race remained holy ; and 
thus, that "in the gospel sense," the holy man now 
is less holy than Adam w^as, and is incapable of ren- 
dering to God such a moral service as he might have 
rendered but for the fall. 



INFIRMITIES AND SINS. 119 

The consequences of the original transgression, 
which attach to human nature and tend to produce 
this incapacity, receive from this author a variety of 
designations. He speaks of bodily " weaknesses and 
infirmities, which become sources to us of perplexity 
and suffering;" and of "imperfect organs of sense, 
producing a degree of perplexity and obscurity in 
the mental action." He represents these as giving 
rise to << unavoidable errors and imperfections of 
judgment," w^hich he subsequently designates as 
<' involuntary sins," but says they are <^ more com- 
monly and perhaps more justly called imperfections 
or trespasses." These expressions all occur in the 
second Chapter. Subsequently, in Part ii. Chapter 
xvi, he speaks of <-' our various infirmities, our 
defects of judgment, our frequent ignorance of the 
motives and characters of our fellow- men, and the 
relatively wrong acts and feehngs which originate in 
these sources," as "imperfections originally flowing 
from our fallen condition and our connection with 
Adam," — and calls them "infirmities and sins" — 
using the latter term without qualification. Nor can 
we properly object to this phraseology ; for sins they 
must be, if they require an atonement. — This is im- 
mediately succeeded by the following paragraph : — 

" It is in accordance with what has now been 
said, that Christians, who are w^ell established in the 
interior life, whenever they have fallen into such 
errors and infirmities, experience no true peace of 
mind, until they find a sense of forgiveness. For an 
error in judgment, for an ill-placed word when there 



120 DO MERE INFIItMITIES 

was no evil design or intention of saying what was 
wrong, for an action which was undesignedly a mis- 
taken one, either through undue remissness or through 
undue haste, for any unavoidable bhndnesses and 
ignorances whatever, which are followed by evil and 
unhappy results, they find no resource but in an im- 
mediate and believing application to the atoning 
blood. It is true, they do not ordinarily have those 
bitter feelings of condemnation and remorse, which 
they have, when they have committed a deliberate 
transgression ; but they feel deep humiliation and 
sorrow of heart; they see the results of sin flowing 
from the original rebelUon ; and have what may per- 
haps be called an instinctive conviction, that the oc- 
casion is a fitting one for penitent grief and humble 
confession. Now as such infirmities are very fre- 
quent, and as indeed they are unavoidable, so long 
as we come short of the intellectual and physical 
perfection of Adam, we shall have abundant occasion 
to confess our trespasses ; and it will ever be true, 
that our sin, in this sense of the term, will always 
be before us." Pp. 353, 354. 

We have quoted this last paragraph entire, for the 
purpose of saying, that to our mind it appears to 
confound things which are totally distinct. Surely 
" errors in judgment," <^ ill-placed words," or «' mis- 
taken actions," where such ignorance, or error, or 
mistake can be referred to "undue remissness" — 
even to the neglect of any of the means of informa- 
tion, — or to «< undue haste," are not to be classed 
with << unavoidable blindnesses or ignorances." 



REQUIRE AN ATONEMENT AND CONFESSION? 121 

Such " errors" and such '(• mistakes" are palpable 
\dolations of the Divine law, and are too closely akin 
to the original transgression to escape the notice of a 
careful observer. " The woman was deceived." 
Here was undoubtedly an <« unavoidable ignorance." 
For this she was not condemned : her guilt lay in 
allowing herself to be led astray by this, '' through 
undue remissness," to a wrong — perhaps we may 
say — " mistaken" action. When sanctified Chris- 
tians fall into such << errors and infirmities," though 
not " deliberate transgressions," we do not wonder 
that they should '' experience no true peace of mind, 
until they find a sense of forgiveness" — that they 
should ''feel deep humiliation and sorrow of heart," 
and feel ^< that the occasion is a fitting one for peni- 
tent grief and for humble confession." These, we 
apprehend, are temporary lapses, from which they 
have to be recovered, or suflfer the penalties of 
actual sin. 

But aside from these, in the extracts made, and in 
their immediate connection, we are presented with 
" infirmities and imperfections," ''unavoidable" and 
"involuntary," because they result "from our fallen 
condition" — "from Adam's sin." Even these lat- 
ter, we are told emphatically, '^require an atone- 
ment^'^'^ and also "confession." "Without the 
shedding of blood and confession, there is no more 
remission in this case than in any other;" that is, 
than in " deliberate and voluntary transgression." — 
This statement our author thinks to be nearly coin- 
cident with the views of Wesley ; and it is doubtless 

11 



122 DO MERE INFIRMITIES 

very closely allied to the peculiarity in his system 
which we have partially examined. In our former 
reference to this sentiment, however, w^e simply 
traced its origin, and showed that Wesley held it 
only as a sort of speculation, and that it has not been 
retained, so as to be identified with the Wesleyan 
system as presented by the followers of that extra- 
ordinary man. As we here have the theory revived, 
and especially, as we have its principal elements 
philosophically stated, we have reserved for this 
place most of what we wished to say on the abstract 
question. 

In regard, then, to this class of infirmities and 
imperfections, it is to be premised that they are con- 
sidered by our author to embrace (1) bodily weak- 
nesses and infirmities, such as " disordered organs of 
sight, hearing, and touch," and (2) such <« perplexity 
and obscurity in the mental action," or, in other words, 
such «< erroneous action of the mind," as arises, 
directly or indirectly, but necessarily, out of these 
physical infirmities. (See as above. Chap, ii.) In 
our last extract, also, these infirmities and imperfec- 
tions are referred directly to the want of "the intel- 
lectual and physical perfection of Adam." — And 
now, firsts we object to this whole view, as resting 
on a basis too hypothetical and uncertain. It seems 
to us that we have not knowledge enough, as to what 
was the actual "intellectual and physical perfection" 
of our first parents, to authorize us to employ the 
distinction between them and ourselves, in fixing 
the standard of Christian perfection, or in determin- 



REQUIRE AN ATONEMENT AND CONFESSION? 123 

ing what is, and what is not sin. Even they, as we 
have seen, must have been imperfect, in several im- 
portant respects. How, then, are we to know, at 
w^hat point our "penitence'' and <' confession" are 
to begin? Secondly^ admitting the disparity, here 
assumed, between the bodily and mental powers of 
our first parents and of their degenerate offspring ; 
and admitting that the extent of this disparity is well 
known, — our system says, that it has nothing to do 
in the case. Even if our organs of sense, and all 
our other physical organs have suffered by the fall ; 
and if the intellect does consequently act with less 
of energy and accuracy; and even if the sensibilities 
have been affected in consequence of their connec- 
tion with the intellect, — we reply, that all these im- 
perfections are entirely destitute of moral character. 

On the supposition that they are sins, and as such 
require an atonement, we have seen in a former 
chapter* what kind of sins they are, and how the 
atonement for them must be applied. But we now 
see that they cannot be sins at all — that they in no 
way partake of the nature of sins. What, for ex- 
ample, has a deaf ear, or a blind eye, or a mutilated 
limb, or even a deformed head, with all their possible 
necessary and unavoidable effects on the mental 
action, to do with moral character, — that they should 
" require an atonement," or demand <' confession ?" 
Yet they are the effects of sin, — <' infirmities and 
imperfections," the legitimate offspring of the origi- 

* Pages 107, 108. 



124 DO MERE INFIRMITIES 

nal transgression — of "Adam's sin ;" and those who 
expatiate the most extensively on the original phy- 
sical perfections of man will be the last probably to 
raise a question on this point. But take the stronger 
case, that of physical decay and death — still more 
obviously the effect of sin — producing every degree 
of mental imbecility and ignorance, even down to 
total idiocy ; and who ever considers these as re- 
quiring in the sanctified man even '' confession" of 
any kind ? — not to use the stronger language — '« peni- 
tent grief and humble confession." Such a sugges- 
tion becomes palpably absurd, on the mere statement; 
since, from the very nature of the case, such errors 
and shortcomings can, in most instances, never be- 
come subjects of observation by those w^ho commit 
them. Where, then, can be found the ground for 
penitence or confession ? And this principle must 
of course cover the case of all the errors of unavoid- 
able ignorance into which the perfect man can fall ; 
and it furnishes the only true basis of distinction 
between sins and infirmities. 

This is a vital point ; and we must be more spe- 
cific in its treatment. — In theory, all admit the ex- 
istence of these two classes of errors, — the one 
resulting from the derangement of the moral nature ; 
the other flowing unavoidably from physical or inteU 
ledual defects. They can never be confounded in 
the Divine mind, and rarely by the enlightened con- 
sciousness of man. From the view we have pre- 
sented, while the former are sins^ the latter are 
simply infirmities^ which have no moral character, 



REQUIRE AN ATONEMENT AND CONFESSION? 12& 

and which cannot therefore properly be considered 
sinSy in any authorized sense of that term. As sins, 
the former, of course, require an atonement. The 
doctrine, however, that even all moral derangement 
requires '« penitence" and ^« confession," as well as 
an <« atonement," it would be foreign to our pur- 
pose to discuss; though we cannot admit it, without 
obviously unsettling the principle on which depends 
the salvation of infants, and thus disturbing questions 
on which we suppose the Christian world are be- 
coming well agreed. 

That the latter, however, — the «< unavoidable in- 
firmities," to which we are subject only because 
<'w^e come short of the intellectual and physical per- 
fections of Adam," — also require penitence and con- 
fession, we believe to be still farther from the truth, 
as it is more peculiar to the system of this author. 
One of the most legitimate and necessary conse- 
quences from this doctrine is, as we have just hinted ^ 
that as by age or physical decay, the holy man gra- 
dually sinks into a state of physical and mental imbe- 
cility, his <' infirmities and sins" must multiply upon 
him, till "penitent grief and humble confession" 
would become the sole exercise of his pious heart. 
Now, to bring this theory to the test of experience, 
how often do we find the highest moral develop- 
ments, after both mind and body have become 
enfeebled by age or disease. Dr. Payson, w^hose 
chief religious exercise, we may almost say, during 
all the most active and useful part of his life was 
"penitence" and "confession," when laid aside from 
11* 



126 DO MERE INFIRMITIES 

labor, and suffering the consequences of human 
transgression in being called to stand on the verge 
of the grave, devotes himself to praise, <'God," 
says he, " has been depriving me of one blessing 
after another; but as every one was removed, he 
has come in and filled up its place ; and now, when 
I am a cripple, and not able to move, I am happier 
than ever I was in my life before, or ever expected 
to be. — If God had told me some time ago, that he 
was about to make me as happy as I could be in this 
w^orld, and then had told me that he should begin 
by crippling me in all my limbs, and removing me 
from all my usual sources of enjoyment ; I should 
have thought it a very strange mode of accomplish- 
ing his purpose !" — Nor is this an isolated case. St. 
Paul says ; — '' Though our outward man perish, yet 
the inward man is renewed day by day," 2 Cor. iv, 
16 ; and thousands, of every degree of mental 
endowment, and of every condition of the mortal 
frame, have verified this saying. And well it is so. 
For if, according to the most legitimate conse- 
quences of this system, the inward man perishes 
with the outward — if, when heart and flesh fail, God 
should cease to be the strength of the heart, who 
could hope that his sun would go down otherwise 
than in darkness and gloom ! 

The Scripture argument in favor even of an atone- 
ment for acts having their origin in unavoidable men- 
tal or physical weakness or imperfection, appears to 
be based on the demands of the Levitical law. See 
Lev. iv ; v, 17, ad Jin.; and Numb, xv, 24 — 30, 



REQUIRE AN ATONEMENT AND CONFESSION ? 127 

where a sacrifice is required for errors and violations 
of the law ignorantly committed. — This principle, if 
adhered to, will be found to prove too much. Sacri- 
fices were also required for several diseases, such 
even as were providentially inflicted, Lev. xiii, xiv ; 
and for various kinds of defilement, or uncleanness 
of the body. Lev. v, 2, 3 ; xii ; xv. It was in 
pursuance of the requirements of this law, that the 
parents of Jesus, after his birth, offered a sacrifice as 
a sin-offering, whereby the priest made atonement 
for her who had borne him. (Compare Lev. xii, 8, 
with Luke ii, 24.) Who can say where was the sin 
in this case for w^hich atonement was to be made ! 
The priest, in certain cases, was also required by 
this law to '< make an atonement" for inanimate ob- 
jects. Lev. xiv, 33, ad Jin, These provisions were 
all undoubtedly designed, as they were beautifully 
adapted, to impress upon the Jewish mind the doc- 
trine of the perfect moral purity of Jehovah. 

The idea of moral purity or holiness having been, by 
these appropriate symbols, distinctly presented to the 
human mind, the new dispensation has put away all 
these symbolic rites. These were but <' the shadow 
of good things to come, and not the very image of 
the things." He, then, who expects to find an 
exact correspondence between the symbols of this 
shadowy dispensation and the actual developments 
of the new, expects it without the warrant of Scrip- 
ture. Under the new covenant, God says of his peo- 
ple : " I will put my laws into their mind, and write 
them in their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, 



128 DO MERE INFIRMITIES 

and they shall be to me a people." Heb. viii, 10. 
Thus the law of God is distinctly written on the heart 
of the perfect man ; there he reads it, and knows it ; 
and should he violate it, he would sin. Such is the 
heart of the perfect man — loving God, and knowing 
his law and doing it ; and as to his hody^ instead of 
being required constantly to offer sacrifices for its 
constitutional peculiarities, or of being excluded 
from bringing offerings to God in consequence of 
personal blemishes or defects. Lev. xxi, 16, ad fin, ^ 
it is deemed as one of <'' the members of Christ" — as 
a fit '< temple of the Holy Ghost." Thus we are 
taught that we may <•' glorify God in our bodies and 
our spirits, which are His," 1 Cor. vi, 20, — that 
our "bodies" even, may <'be presented to God, 
as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable. '^'^ Rom. 
xii, 1. 

Beyond the perfection in knowledge here recog- 
nised and promised under the new covenant, and 
the perfection of body consequent on purity of life, 
we find no mental or physical perfection required 
of man in the moral law. We do not find it in the 
original requisition of perfect obedience, or any- 
where among the statutes given on Sinai, any more 
than we find it under the new dispensation. Such 
requirements are found only under the Levitical 
economy — under a system which the Apostle after- 
wards called a " burden," which neither he nor his 
fathers were able to bear. And it is worthy of re- 
mark, that we have no intimation that the most per- 
fect men, even under that dispensation, were evei 



REQUIRE AN ATONEMENT AND CONFESSION ? 129 

called on to offer the sacrifice for sins of ignorance 
against any of the commandments of the Lord. We 
have no hesitation, however, in admitting, that 
among the consequences of the general imperfection 
of our knowledge — though not itself a moral defect, 
there may be a never-ceasing doubt in the mind of 
the sanctified man, whether he does constantly and 
fully use the grace he possesses, so as to omit 
nothing which he ought to perform. Thus he 
may perhaps feel that he is entirely safe, only 
when, from the heart he joins in the universal 
petition dictated by our Lord : — ^'Forgive us our 
trespasses, ^^ 

And how diflferently does this petition fall upon 
the ear, as it proceeds from the lips of the Great 
Teacher, when considered as offered up with this 
view, and in this spirit ; from what it does, when 
considered as the language of << penitence and of 
grief," daily to be poured forth from the pious soul, 
oppressed and borne down by «' infirmities and sins" 
from which he can hope to be free only when freed 
by death from <' the intellectual and physical imper- 
fections of Adam !" — We believe there are many in 
the Christian church, taught, it may be, only by the 
Spirit of God on this subject, who have long since 
laid aside this " penitent grief and humble confes- 
sion," through faith in the atoning blood of Christ, 
" whom having not seen, they love, and in whom 
believing, they rejoice with joy unspeakable and full 
of glory." 1 Pet. i, 8. Joy unspeakable, instead of 
penitent griefs it appears, then, ruled the hearts of 



130 INFIRMITIES CONFOUNDED WITH SINS. 

some of those addressed by the Apostle ; and thus, 
it seems to us, it should be with all those in whom 
— the love of God has been perfected. Yet thus it 
cannot be, if the distinction between infirmities and 
sins is no broader than it is made by this excellent 
author. 

We cannot leave this subject without referring, 
more fully than was done in the chapter on the Wes- 
leyan theology, to what we deem the fundamental 
error which, with Dr. Upham as well as with Wes- 
ley, has led to the confounding of things, in their na- 
ture so essentially distinct. This error is, as we 
think, found in the proposition already quoted, — 
« God is to be regarded as righteous in exacting from 
us whatever we could or might have rendered him, 
if Adam had not fallen, and if the race had remained 
holy." — The context shows that this statement is to 
be understood as it is expressed, in an unqualified 
sense, — that is, as extending to man's intellectual 
and physical, as well as to his moral powers ; while 
it is assumed, that as a fallen creature, he is both 
« physically and intellectually imperfect.'' Now, 
since no provision has been made by which man 
can become physically and intellectually what he 
might have been had Adam not fallen, this proposi- 
tion is obviously neither more nor less than — that 
God is to be regarded as righteous, in exacting from 
every son of Adam that kind or degree of service 
which, from the very nature of the case, he never 
can render. Against this doctrine, in whatever lan- 
guage it is couched, or by whatever formula ex- 



INFIRMITIES CONFOUNDED WITH SINS. 131 

pressed, we feel bound to enter our solemn protest. 
And even where it is assumed as a primary truth, 
without finding expression in words, it is equally 
dishonorable to the character of the Christian's God. 
When man had fallen, the problem to be solved 
by infinite wisdom was — The perfect law^ of God 
remaining in full force, to save degenerate man. — 
Those who adopt the view we controvert, agree with 
us in asserting, that the solution was found in the 
atonement effected by Jesus Christ ; and in the im- 
parting of some measure of supernatural ability or 
power to such as avail themselves of the provisions 
of this atonement. But, instead of presenting the 
atonement as suflSciently effective perfectly to restore 
man to the image of his Maker, instead of pointing 
to man, when renewed in righteousness — his heart 
being sanctified by the influence of Divine grace and 
filled with God's love — as having the power to meet 
every demand which God makes of him ; this view 
of the matter makes even his moral restoration but 
partial — leaving him, in his best estate, and in the 
exercise of all his natural and supernatural powers, 
but a constant violator of God's law, and destined, 
at least during his connection with the body, to 
mourn over his sins against the God he loves. 
<' Deep humiliation and sorrow of heart," '' penitent 
grief and humble confession" — in view of the viola- 
tions of a law they cannot keep, constitute, then, the 
most exalted privilege of the sons of God on earth ! 
May w^e not ask the advocates of this stinted system 
of grace, at least to conceive of a sjstem, in which 



132 INFIRMITIES CONFOUNDED WITH SINS. 

the measure of supernatural ability granted to the 
pure in heart is such, that they may be kept by the 
power of God, through faith in the atoning blood, 
from every violation of God's holy law. Is such a 
freedom from the necessity of sinning desirable ? 
Then may we commend to those who hunger and 
thirst after righteousness, and who would be filled 
with all the fullness of God^ to elevate their faith to 
the standard of their desires ; and look to Him, who, 
we are assured, '' is able to do exceeding abundantly 
above all that we ask or think, according to the 
power that worketh in us." 

We believe that the thoughtful reader will receive 
with caution a doctrine, which attributes only such 
partial results to the atonement effected at so vast 
an expense ; and we should not wonder if he who 
adopts it should look forward into the future world 
with trembling apprehension, lest death should leave 
him incapable of meeting the extraordinary exaction 
represented here as coming from a righteous God, 
For who can assure himself, that even the sainted 
spirit can love and serve his God with all that strength 
of devotion he might have rendered Him if the race 
had remained holy ? or that God wull be any more 
ready to relax the righteous claims of his law in 
favor of the redeemed in heaven, than of the sanctified 
on earth ? Nothing, as it seems to us, but the clear- 
est W'arrant of Scripture, ought to authorize the adop- 
tion of such a system ; and we have searched in vain 
to find its elements anywhere in the revelation of 
God. God himself now^l^ere presents us with such 



INFIRMITIES CONFOUNDED WITH SINS. 133 

a view of His " righteousness," or with only such 
results as flowing from the atonement made by the 
Son of his love.* 



* After this chapter was written, President Mahan's work 
on The Will fell into our hands, in which are found soine re- 
marks on this subject — entirely in point : — 

'- PRESENT IMPOSSIBILITIES REQUIRED." 
" The last dogma that I notice is the position, that the Moral 
law demands of us, as sinners, not what is now possible to us 
on the ground of natural powers and proffered grace, but what 
would be possible had we never sinned. It is admitted by all, 
that we have not now a capacity for that degree of virtue 
which would be possible to us, had we always developed our 
moral powers in harmony with the Divine law. Still it is 
maintained, that this degree of virtue, notwithstanding our 
present total incapacity to exercise it, is demanded of us. 
For not rendering it, we are justly bound over to the wrath 
and curse of God. In reply, I remark : 

« 1. That this dogma, which is professedly founded on the 
express teachings of Inspiration, has not even the shadow of 
a foundation in any direct or implied affirmation of the Bible. 
I may safely challenge the world to adduce a single passage 
of Holy Writ, that either directly or indirectly asserts any 
such thing. 

« 2. This dogma is opposed not only to the spim^, but to the 
htter of the law. The law, addressing men, enfeebled as their 
powers now are, in consequence of sin previously committed, 
requires them to love God with all their < mind and strength,' 
that is, not with the power they would have possessed, had 
they never sinned, but with the power they now actually pos- 
sess. On what authority does any theologian affirm, when 
the law expressly makes one demand upon men, that it, in 
reality, makes another and diffisrent demand 1 In such an 

12 



134 THE TEMPTATIONS 

This author fully agrees with our view of a growth 
and progression in holiness, and explains it on the 
same principles. (Part ii. Chap, xv.) As to the 



assertion, is he not wise, not only above, bat against what is 
written ] 

" 3. This dogma is opposed to the express and positive 
teachings of Inspiration. The Scriptures expressly affirm, 
(Rom. xiii, 8,) that ev^ery one that exercises love, < hath ful- 
filled the law,* hath done all that the law requires of him. 
This would not be true, did the law require a degree of love 
not now practicable to the creature. Again, in Deut. x, 12, it 
is positively affirmed, that God requires nothing of his crea- 
tures but to * love him with all the heart and with all the 
soul,' that is, with all the powers they actually possess. 
This could not be true, if the dogma under consideration is 
true. 

<* 4. If we conceive an individual [who thus loves God with 
all the heart] to yield a voluntary conformity to moral obliga- 
tions of every kind, to the full extent of his present capacities, 
it is. impossible for us to conceive that he is not now doing 
all that he really ought to do. No person would ever think 
of exhorting him to do more, or of charging him with guilt 
for not doing it. We may properly blame him for the past, 
but as far as the present is concerned he stands guiltless in 
the eye of reason and revelation both. 

" 5. Let us suppose that an individual continues for fifty 
years in sin. He is then truly converted, and immediately 
after, dies. All admit that he enters heaven in a state of per- 
fect holiness. Yet no one supposes that he now exercises, 
or has the capacity to exercise, as high a degree of holiness, 
as he would, had he spent those fifty years in obedience, in- 
stead of disobedience to God. This shows that even those 
who theoretically hold the dogma under consideration, do not 
practically believe it themselves.'* 



OF THE SANCTIFIED CHRISTIAN. 135 

nature, also, of the excitement which accompanies 
the presentation of an object of temptation to the 
mind, in all his general representations he seems to 
agree with us, that it may innocently reach even to 
a conscious tendency of the desire — appetite, pro- 
pensity, or affection — to seek its gratification in the 
seducing object ; and that our power, which in the 
sanctified man must always be commensurate with 
our duty, lies not in preventing the existence of such 
action of the natural sensibilities, but in suppressing 
and overcoming it. Numerous passages might be 
quoted to this effect. We select the following para- 
graph : — 

<■' The person w'ho is in the enjoyment of true spi- 
ritual liberty, is no longer enthralled by the desires, 
— such as the desire of society, the desire of know- 
ledge, the desire of the world's esteem, and the like. 
These principles operate in the man of true inward 
liberty, as they w^ere designed to operate, but never 
with the powder to enslave. He desires, for instance, 
to go into society, and, in compliance with the sug- 
gestions of the social principle, to spend a portion 
of time in social intercourse ; but he finds it entirely 
easy, although the desire, in itself considered, may 
be somewhat marked and strong, to keep it in strict 
subordination to his great purpose of doing every 
thing for the glory of God. Or perhaps, under the 
influence of another propensive tendency, that of the 
principle of curiosity, he desires to read a book of 
much interest, w^hich some individual has placed be- 
fore him ; but he finds it entirely within his power, 



136 THE TEMPTATIONS 

as in the other case, to check his desire, and to keep 
it in its proper place. In neither of these instances, 
nor in others hke them, is he borne down, as we 
often perceive to be the case, by an almost uncon- 
trollable tendency of mind. The desire, as soon as 
it begins to exist, is at once brought to the true test. 
The question at once arises. Is the desire of spending 
my time in this w^ay conformable to the will of God } 
And if it is found, or suspected to be, at variance 
with the Divine will, it is dismissed at once. The 
mind is conscious of an inward strength which ena- 
bles it to set at defiance all enslaving tendencies of 
this nature." Pp. 332, 333. 

Here the tendency is felt, <«the desire may be 
somewhat marked and strong;" but <'if it is found, 
or suspected to be, at variance with the Divine wdll, 
it is dismissed at once." This is precisely as we 
have represented it in the case of our first parents ; 
and according to this writer, the sanctified Christian 
may not only experience this kind of temptation, 
but it may and often does become " violent," so as 
to call for "decided resistance." P. 207. 

This is in perfect accordance with the definitions 
given of temptation in a former chapter f and with 
that of this author himself, when he says : — <' Temp- 
tations, or tempting objects, are those objects, which 
are presented by the intellect to the sensibilities and 
the will ; and are of such a nature that they have a 
tendency to induce or cause in the sensitive part of 



* Pa^es 19—21. 



OF THE SANCTIFIED CHRISTIAN. 137 

our nature, viz. : in the appetites, propensities, and 
affections, and also in the will, a wrong action." 
P. 200. Here the presentation of the object to the 
sensibilities appears to be the chief element in the 
definition. Now it happens, that in immediate con- 
nection with this, and in direct conflict, as we con- 
ceive, with the representations of every other part of 
the book, we find such statements as the following : — 
'' If the temptations advance in their influence be- 
yond the intellect and take eflfect in the desires and 
will, prompting them to action, — they are always 
attended with sin;" and again negatively, " If it 
[temptation] stops at the limit of the intellectual 
action, and does not enter into the heart and the 
will, there is no sin." The general bearing of these 
statements cannot be misunderstood ; the object is, 
as set forth with suflScient distinctness, to show that 
temptations in view of prohibited objects, in their 
innocent stage, <■<- are limited in their results to the 
intellectual action, and do not in any degree take 
eflfect in the desires." This theory is further ex- 
plained, thus: — <' Hence, when temptations of this 
particular character are presented, ahhough they do 
not take eflfect in the desires, they are both perceived 
and felt to be temptations ; that is to say, there is a 
clear perception of their true character, both in them- 
selves and in relation to certain possible results. 
And in addition to this, there appears to be an in- 
stinctive and prompt alarm of the sensitive and moral 
nature. The desires and affections are not inert and 
dormant, as some may perhaps suppose ; neither are 



138 THE TEMPTATIONS 

the conscience and the will ; but all seem to be pene- 
trated with the sense of imminent hazard, and are 
thrown into the conscious attitude of repellency." 
P. 203. 

(1.) We remark, in regard to this view, that it ex- 
ists in the w^ork before us as a mere speculation ; and 
seems to us to conflict with numerous passages found 
in the more practical parts of the book, one of which 
we have just now presented. And this remark we 
make for the purpose of saying, that whenever we 
find an apparent conflict between the practical views 
of any man and his speculations, w^e always attach 
more importance to the former than the latter. We 
do not find that the author has himself attempted 
any practical application of the principle or specula- 
tion in question. 

(2.) We deem this theory, considered even as a 
speculation, unphilosophical, in every light in which 
it can be viewed. If by there being no effect pro- 
duced on the desires by temptation, it is only meant, 
as expressed in one place in the statement as re-writ- 
ten by the author,^ that there is " no pleased and 
consentient action" secured, then the whole be- 
comes plain and consistent. But this cannot be all 
that is meant. His intellectual temptation, even in the 
corrected version of the theory, is carefully defined, 
so as to exclude all proper action of the natural 
sensibilities. It embraces the perception of the 

* Compare the volume under consideration, with the Guide 
to Christian Perfection, for July, 1840, p. 4. 



OF THE SANCTIFIED CHRISTIAN. 139^ 

tempting object, " not only as an object, but as an 
object of temptation," the perception of the '< possi- 
bility of a farther and sinful action of the mind," 
together with a <« distinct sense of danger." These 
are its elements. Now, in regard to the combination 
of mental states here exhibited, we must remark, 
that according to any philosophical principles known 
to us, the perception of an object as an object of 
temptation cannot arise in the mind, unless we have 
previously had either some admonition or experi- 
ence of its seducing character. In the garden of 
Eden, the fatal tree had been pointed out as an object 
of moral danger; but we suppose it in accordance 
with the experience of the world, that entirely new 
occasions, and those the most unexpected, are often 
presented by Satan as a medium of temptation ; and 
that even objects perfectly innocent frequently be- 
come the occasions of temptations to excess. In 
such cases, without admonition and without experi- 
ence, what can there be in the object, to make it ap- 
pear an object of temptation'^ What is there to 
suggest the " sense of danger ?" The mere intellec- 
tual perception of the object cannot, of course, give 
it. It seems to follow, therefore, that it must arise, 
if it arise at all, from the very element which, accord- 
irig to Dr. Upham himself, constitutes it a tempta- 
tion — from the presentation of the object to its ap- 
propriate desire or propension, and some consequent 
excitement there ; and this is only in accordance 
with every philosophical or scriptural definition of 
temptation we have had the fortune to meet with. 



140 THE TEMPTATIONS 

Yet, in the statement of this hypothetical tempta- 
tion, not only is all such action in the natural sen- 
sibilities studiously excluded, but the tendency to 
excitement there is most effectually cut off; since, 
with the bait, both the snare and the danger must 
be seen — the sight of the snare and the perception 
of the danger, appear not less essential to the temp- 
tation than the perception of the bait itself. And this 
is the whole of temptation in its ^'innocent stage P"^ 

(3.) We cannot leave this theory of intellectual 
temptation, without remarking further ; that though 
its author has himself made no particular application 
of it, it has become in the hands of others a test 
of Christian experience — a test which we believe to 
be unknown in the Scriptures, new in the church, 
and dangerous in its tendencies. The temptations, 
of the sanctified man must, according to this, embrace 
nothing bat the intellectual perceptions connected 
with the object, except perhaps the feeling of moral 
abhorrence. We have heard it argued by those who 
have adopted this theory into their system of theo- 
logy, that the subject of temptation cannot innocently, 
even for a moment, have any feeling of interest in 
regard to the tempting object. Even the unfortu- 
nate inebriate, though resolved on resistance and 
reformation, yet should he, on having presented to 
him his favorite beverage, feel any other excitement 
than that of loathing, w^ould as certainly sin as though 
he yielded himself a slave to the seductions of the 
cup ; and that, how^ever manfully and successfully 
he resisted such excitement ! It has been gravely, 



OF THE SANCTIFIED CHRISTIAN. 141 

and with an air of triumph, asked, — «<When the ap- 
petite (as in the case just referred to) is in a proper 
condition to be excited by a Imvful excitant, would 
it, in a sanctified mind, feel the least excitement 
from an unlaiafid^ but equally natural excitant ? 
Would not the excitement produced by the thought 
be horror instead of desire — a horror which, for the 
time, would suppress all desire, even that which is 
lawful ?"* — Thus, when a practical application 
comes to be made of this system, it obviously dis- 
penses at once with the idea of a successful Christian 
warfare ; for there could be no contest in regard to 
objects of loathing and horror ; and as regards ob- 
jects of temptation, there is no other alternative but 
loathing or sin. — The same conclusion is forced upon 
us by the direct statement of the author himself, as 
just quoted — that the desires^ the affections and the 
will in the sanctified man become allies to the con- 
science — ^^alP^ being ^'thrown into the conscious 
attitude of repellency." When the desires and the 
moral feelings^ '^ those two classes of mental states," 
M'hich in the ordinary conflicts of temptation "stand 
before the will in direct and fierce opposition to each 
other,"! thus espouse the same cause, surely the 
very idea of resistance is taken away ; and Dr. Snod- 
grass may well conclude — the Christian warfare is 
at an end. And yet the general tenor of Dr. Upham's 
views is opposed to any such conclusion. 



*Meth. Quarterly Review, July, 1842, Art. v. 

f Upham's Treatise on The Will, Chap, iii, § 30. 



142 TEMPTATION : BUTLER. 

We entertain the most profound respect for the 
moral feelings of that man, who, under a deep im- 
pression of the holiness of Jehovah and the purity of 
the Divine law, thus stands forth to press upon his 
fellows the corresponding holiness demanded of 
them. From such speculative views, however, as 
we have just been noticing, w^e revert with pleasure 
for a moment to views on the same subject, more 
practical as well as more philosophical ; — more prac- 
tical, because more in accordance with Scripture 
and with human experience ; and more philoso- 
phical, because they represent man, even when 
renewed and sanctified, as man still, divested of 
none of the essential elements of humanity. — Bishop 
Butler says : — '<• Together with the general principle 
of moral understanding, we have in our inward frame 
various affections toward particular objects. These 
affections are naturally, and of right, subject to the 
government of the moral principle, as to the occa- 
sions upon which they may be gratified : as to the 
times, degrees and manner, in which the objects of 
them may be pursued : but then the principle of 
virtue can neither excite them, nor prevent their 
being excited. On the contrary, they are naturally 
felt, w^hen the objects of them are present to the 
mind, not only before all consideration, whether they 
can be obtained by lawful means, but after it is 
found they cannot. For the natural objects of affec- 
tion continue so : the necessaries, conveniences, and 
pleasures of life, remain naturally desirable; though 
they cannot be obtained innocently ; nay, though 



TEMPTATION ! KNAPP. 143 

they cannot possibly be obtained at all. And when 
the objects of any affection whatever cannot be ob- 
tained without unlawful means, but may be obtained 
by them ; such affection, though its being excited, 
and its continuing some time in the mind, be as in- 
nocent as it is natural and necessary, yet cannot but 
be conceived to have a tendency to incline persons 
to venture upon such unlawful means : and, there- 
fore, must be conceived as putting them in some 
danger of it."* 

From an elaborate discussion of this and collateral 
subjects, by Knapp, we select the following brief 
extract : — '' From the preponderance of sense now 
explained, particular sinful dispositions and passions 
take their origin, and so are the result and the proof 
of the sinful depravity of man. But in order that we 
may rightly estimate the sinfulness and punishable- - 
ness of these desires, we must attend to the follow- 
ing considerations : — 

[\.) ''The desires of man are not in themselves 
and abstractly considered sinful; for they are deep 
laid in the constitution which God himself has given 
to human nature ; they arise in man involuntarily, 
and so far cannot certainly be imputed to him. The 
essential constitution of man makes it necessary that 
every thing which makes an agreeable impression 
on the senses should inevitably awaken correspondent 
desires. The poor man, who sees himself surrounded 
w4th the treasures of another, feels a natural and in- 

* Analogy, Part i, Chap. v. 



1 44 TEMPTATION : KNAPP. 

voluntary desire to possess them. The mere rising 
of this desire is no more punishable in him than it 
was in Eve, when she saw the tree, and felt an im- 
pulse to eat its beautiful fruit, which is never repre- 
sented in the Bible as her sin. 

(2.) << The desires of man become sinful and de- 
serving of punishment then only when (a) man, feel- 
ing desires after forbidden things, seeks and finds 
pleasure in them, and delights himself in them, and 
so (6) carefully cherishes and nourishes them in his 
heart. (c)When he seeks occasion to awaken the 
desires after forbidden things, and to entertain him- 
self with them, (rf) When he gives audience and 
approbation to these desires, and justifies, seeks, and 
performs the sins to which he is inclined. But if a 
man repels and suppresses the involuntary desire 
' arising within him because it is evil, he cannot cer- 
tainly be punished merely, because without any fault 
of his own, he felt this desire. It w^ere unjust to 
punish any one for being assailed by an enemy, 
without any provocation on his part. 

(3.) ''With this doctrine the holy Scripture is per- 
fectly accordant. Even in his state of innocence 
man felt the rising of desire ; nor was this in him 
counted sin. Gen. iii, 6. Hence we are never re- 
quired, either in the Old Testament or the New, to 
eradicate these desires, (which, indeed, is a thing im- 
possible, and would cause a destruction of human 
nature itself,) but only to keep them under control, 
and to suppress those which fix upon forbidden 
things. It is to those who contend against their 



THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 145 

wicked passions that rewards are promised, and not 
to those who have never had these solicitations and 
allurements to evil. The pretended virtue of such 
men scarcely deserves the name, and is not capable 
of reward."* 

The first of these extracts is quoted with approba- 
tion by Watson ; and he remarks even in regard to 
the perfection of Paradise; — «<It was a state which 
required watchfulness^ and effort^ and prayer^ and 
denial of the appetites and passions^^ — Such seems 
to be the common-sense view of the subject; and 
we believe that few have been the advocates of the 
doctrine, that either Adamic or Christian perfection 
exclude all excitement of the emotions or desires in 
temptation. 

It often happens, that arguments offered in sup- 
port of a preconceived theory are less satisfactory to 
others than to those who propose them. The conclu- 
sion being assumed as true, in the mind of the writer, 
the proofs are rarely scanned by him with great care. 
It has occurred to us, that such might be the origin 
of the theory we have last had under discussion. By 
a reference to the original statement of it, we find it 
to be introduced thus : — '^ Our Saviour was tempted 
by having the kingdoms and wealth of this world 
presented before h m, as objects of desire ; but the 
temptation went no further than the thoughts. It had 

* Christian Theology, Sec. Ixxviii. 
f Institutes, Part ii, Chap. vi. 
13 



146 THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 

no effect upon his desires or will ; but was imme- 
diately rejected."* Here, then, seems to be the as- 
sumed premise, on which this theory, as a conclu- 
sion, rests. If our Saviour's temptations " could 
innocently go no farther than the thoughts," it is but 
a natural inference that those of a good man should 
be restricted within the same limits. To this as- 
sumed proposition, we will, before closing our dis- 
cussion, devote a moment's attention. 

Although the Scriptures give us no speculations 
upon the character of Christ, they give us facts from 
which we are enabled to deduce important conclu- 
sions which are not matters of direct revelation. 
Among the facts touching this matter are, that our 
Saviour was tempted ; that he was tempted hy Satan ; 
that he was very grievously tempted, in so much 
that it is said — he suffered being tempted ; and also, 
that he w^as tempted in all points like as we are. As 
to the precise meaning of some of these expressions, 
we are left to inference. It is not necessary to our 
purpose to attempt to settle the question, whether 
Satan ever appeared to our Saviour in a bodily shape. 
It is sufficient, if suggestions to sin were at any time 
made to his mind by Satanic agency. And as to 
the last expression presented, it cannot, of course, 

* See Guide to Christian Perfection, for July, 1840, p. 4 ; 
quoted also by Dr. Peck, pp. 438, 439. — In the work of Prof. 
Upham before us, this statement is accompanied by qualifying 
remarks, and followed by explanations — ^just enough, as we 
have seen, to obscure the theory, though not enough to obli- 
terate it. 



THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 147 

mean that he actually experienced, in all respects, 
the same temptations which we are liable to; because 
he never sustained all the relations of life from which 
temptations may spring. For example, he was never 
a husband or a father. And yet, the very object of 
his being made subject to temptation, and of his 
suffering by them, was, — ^that he might be "touched 
with the feeling of our infirmities" — that he might 
become ''able to succor those that are tempted." 
So strongly is this point developed, that it is ex- 
pressly said : — '' It behooved him to be made like 
unto his brethreuy^^ for this very purpose, '< that he 
might be a merciful and faithful high-priest." The 
object of our Saviour's temptations being thus dis- 
tinctly stated, we are forced to conclude, that in 
every practical sense, he was tempted in all points 
as men are tempted ; just as he is said to have ful- 
filled the law, though there were many conditions 
and relations embraced in its commands, in w^hich 
he was not, and could not be placed. Though not 
tempted in every identical way in which it is possi- 
ble for man to be tempted, we cannot doubt that his 
temptations were the same in nature, and at least 
equal in degree, with those to which our first parents 
or any of their proper offspring could be innocently 
subject. But we have seen, that these are all sub- 
ject to temptations which reach beyond the mere 
thoughts.* 

The definition of temptation, quoted from the 

* Pages 15—19, 135—145. 



148 THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 

learned Dr. Ullmann, in a former chapter,* was given 
in direct view of the temptations of our Saviour, and 
while discussing '«the sinless character of Jesus.'' 
That the reader may see that our conclusion is in 
full accordance with the deductions of his Essay, we 
introduce, at this point, also, a quotation of some 
length. He supposes that the tempting thoughts 
were not engendered in the soul of Jesus, but were 
suggested to it. Then, << so soon as the tempting 
thought arose in the soul of Jesus, and excited desire, 
it was thrust down by his pure and strong power of 
choice. If," he adds, << we should choose to adopt 
the idea, that Christ's temptation was entirely ex- 
ternal, so that, properly speaking, only Satan made 
an attempt to seduce Jesus, but Jesus was not in- 
wardly affected by it in the least ; so that the tempta- 
tion was therefore objective merely, and not at all 
subjective ; still, I see not, how we can dispose of 
other passages in the New Testament, without admit- 
ting an inward excitement of desire, and a struggle 
ensuing from it in the soul of Jesus. The passages 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, iv, 15, and v, 7, will 
still be left ; so likewise will many occurrences re- 
corded in the Gospels, where the physical appetite, 
the excitability of sense, the passions of Jesus, are 
seen to be in lively movement. Above all, we can 
always appeal to the conflict of his spirit in Gethse- 
mane. There was something in him at that time 
which elicited the wish to be delivered from the 

* Pages 19 and 20. 



THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 149 

fearful suffering that was inseparable from his ele- 
vated destination. But this sensuous part of his hu- 
manity which broke forth strongly for a moment, and 
the wish which was excited by it, did not determine 
the will of Jesus ; no, his power of choice, and of 
pure intellect triumphed ; and the victory was pro- 
claimed in these great words, — ' not as I will, but 
as thou wilt.' We cannot divest Jesus of such ex- 
citements, unless we divest him of humanity ; but 
this we cannot do, for it would contradict the plain 
idea which the New Testament gives of Christ ; nor 
need we do it, for the sensuous power, the excita- 
bility connected with it, the susceptibility resulting 
from it, are inseparable from human nature, and 
therefore cannot be regarded as sinful."* 

Professor Stuart is not less explicit on this point. 
<' With the deepest reverence," says he, " I say it, 
the Lord Jesus Christ himself had a susceptibility of . 
feeling, the power of enticement to sin ; like to that 
which Adam had before his fall. If not, then he did 
not really and truly take on him a human nature. 
The fact that such a susceptibility belonged to Adam 
in his primitive state, shows that it belongs to human 
nature in its perfect probationary state. The blessed 
Saviour, then, might have had it — he did and must 
have had it — in order to be truly man. If not, how 



* German Selections^ by Edwards and Park, pp. 434 — 436. — 
The reader would be benefited by examining this entire 
Essay. 

13* 



150 THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 

could he be tempted to sin ? Above all — how could 
he be "tempted in all points as we are ?'^* 

To obtain additional light, if possible, on so inte- 
resting a subject, we will press our inquiries one step 
farther. Satan has the power to transform himself 
into an angel of light. 2 Cor. xi, 14. Eve was de- 
ceived by him in the garden, 1 Tim. ii, 14; and 
experience says, that good men have ever been liable 
to be approached by Satan in disguise. Was our 
Saviour subject to such temptations ? — If not, we may 
ask, at the very outset of our inquiry, how, accord- 
ing to the reasoning of the Apostle, Heb. ii, 18, he 
has become '< able," by his endurance of temptation, 
"to succor those who are" thus "tempted." But 
this deserves a more minute examination. 

The humanity of him who was the Saviour of the 
world is placed, in the Scriptures, in a prominent 
light. Jesus is called " the last Adam," and, in con- 
trast with the original progenitor of our race, " the 
last man," 1 Cor. xv, 45, 47 ; and under the former 
of these characters some have thought that, as the 
subject of temptation, he may best be contemplated. 
"It was appointed," says Townsend, "that he 
should be tempted like unto Adam^ and undergo the 
same trial,^'^\ Jesus is also styled the Son of Man 



* Biblical Repository, July, 1839, Art. iii. See also Stuart on 
the Romans, Excursus vi ; and Knapp's Ch, Theol., Sec. xciii. 

f See Townsend's notes on the Temptatimi of Christy at 
length. 



THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 151 



in the Scriptures far more frequently than the Son of 
God ; and this designation he usually gives to him- 



m 

God 

self, << because," says Neander, '< he had appeared 
as a man, because he belonged to mankind, — be- 
cause he was himself the realized ideal of huma- 
nity."* His birth, his infancy, his childhood, his 
youth, and his manhood, to the age of thirty years, 
were throughout in accordance with this character. 
The miracle which he performed in Cana of Galilee, 
after his entrance on his public ministry, is called 
apxn ^^ (SYi^itii^v, this beginning of miracles , Johnii, 11. 
He was introduced into the world an infant ; and 
had senses and organs of sense as we have. We are 
expressly told, that he was subject to his parents, 
Luke ii, 51 ; and it is at least probable, that he 
worked with his father at the trade of a carpenter. 
Mark vi, 3. His early life was so perfectly in ac- 
cordance with the laws which ordinarily regulated 
human development, that his brothers who had dwelt 
under the same roof, and had seen him grow up side 
by side with themselves, did not believe on him, John 
vii, 5 ; and when he began to be surrounded with the 
multitudes who came together to see his mighty works, 
his friends (his kindred) went out to lay hold on him, 
saying that he w^as beside himself. Mark iii, 21. He 
increased in wisdom, as a man, Luke ii, 52 ; he hun- 
gered and thirsted, and endured fatigue as a man, 
Mark xi, 12 ; John iv, 6, 7 ; he prayed as a man, 
Luke vi, 12, — even offering up prayers and suppli- 

* Life of Jesus, § 59. 



152 THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 

cations, with strong crying and tears. Heb. v, 7. 
As a man, he wept at the grave of his friend, John 
xi, 35 ; he was a man of sorrows, and acquainted 
with grief, Isa. Hii, 3 ; Matt, xxvi, 38 ; as a man, 
he learned obedience by the things which he suffered, 
Heb. V, 8 ; indeed, as a man, he was made perfect 
through suffering. Heb. ii, 10. When the physical 
and mental agony of the garden came upon him, says 
Dr. Jenkyn, ''he felt as a man, and prayed, ' Father, 
if thou be willing, remove this cup from me ; never- 
theless, not my will, but thine be done.' Aversion 
to suffering is an affection essential to every living 
being. Such an affection is in itself innocent and 
sinless ; and had the blessed Mediator been without 
such aversion to pain, he would not have appeared 
really and truly a man; nor would he have appeared 
so great a sufferer."* Finally, he suffered death, as a 
man, on the cross. It was in this character alone he 
exclaimed, — '< My God, my God, why hast thou for- 
saken me ?" He was, indeed, avOpoirco^ Xptatb^ 'irjaov^, 
the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim. ii, 5 ; and men are 
called his brethren. Heb. ii, 11 — 14. Says Dr, 
South, '' He took not only the privileges, the excel- 
lences and perfections of the human nature upon 
him, though these had been degradations enough to 
him, who was the express image of his Father's 
brightness ; but he clothed himself with all his v/eak- 
nesses and infirmities, bowed down his glories to the 
limited meanness of our faculties, to the poorness 

* The Extent of the Atonement, Chap, ii, Sec. v. 



THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 153 

and affliction of our appetites : he hungered, and 
thirsted, and was weary ; lay open to all the stings 
of grief, and the invasions of pain. So that, whatso- 
ever the boldness or ignorance of heresy may affirm 
of him, by all the instances of a sad experience, he 
found himself to be really a man."* 

Christ was also emphatically the Son of God ; and 
as such, in the language of Knapp, — " It was pos- 
sible for him to exercise his Divine attributes. But, 
on account of the work which he had to perform 
upon earth, he forbore the full use of them.^f The 
principle involved in his reply to Satan, in the first 
of the temptations in the wilderness, was, doubtless, 
as Neander has expressed it, — " that he had no wish 
to free himself from the sense of human weakness 
and dependence ; that he would work no miracle for 
that purpose. "J In accordance with this principle, 
throughout the whole of his eventful life, we are not 
informed that he ever brought into exercise one attri- 
bute of Divinity, solely to relieve any want or to alle- 
viate any suffering of which himself was the subject. 
Such an exercise of the Divine attributes appears not 
to have been necessary to the work which his Fa- 
ther had given him to do. 

Jesus was the great teacher, as well as the Re- 
deemer, of man. And there is probably genuine 
philosophy in the casual remark of an author whom 



* Posthumous Sermons^ Serm. xxv, — London, 1843. 
•j" Christian Theology, Sec. xcii. 
+ Life of Jesus, § 43. 



154 THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 

we have before quoted : — <•<• If the Almighty designed 
ever to give a perfect and final system of instruction 
to mankind, it could be done only by placing in this 
world a perfect human nature."* Bishop Porteus 
has somewhere expanded this same thought, particu- 
larly, so far as the instructions of our Saviour con- 
sisted in his perfect example, when he remarks : — 
««Had he always or often delivered himself from the 
sufferings and the distresses incident to human nature, 
by the exertion of his miraculous powers, the benefit 
of his example would have been in a great measure 
lost to mankind ; and it would have been of little use 
to us that he was tempted as we are^ because he would 
have been supported and succored as we cannot ex- 
pect to be." Another writer more boldly inquires : — 
<< Had he, when made in the likeness of men, saved 
himself by miracles from the evils of humanity ; 
where had been his conflict, his victory, his triumph ? 
or where the consolation and benefit his followers de- 
rive from his example, his merit, his crown ?"t But 
among "the sufferings and distresses incident to 
human nature" — among "these evils of humanity," 
was temptation. It was solely as a man that our Sa- 
viour was tempted ; for " God cannot be tempted 



* Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation^ Chap. x. 

•j- Jin Inquiry into the Nature and Design of Chrisfs Temptation 
in the Wilderness^ by Hugh Farmer, Chap. iv. — This treatise, 
particularly the general doctrines set forth in the chapter here 
referred to, is specially commended to the attention of the 
reader. 



THE TEMPTATIONS OF OUR SAVIOUR. 155 

with evil." James i. 13. He must have suffered, 
then, as good men in all ages have suffered, from the 
suggestions of Satan as an angel of light, unless pre- 
vented by the exercise of the Divine attribute of om- 
niscience ; and to us, in view of his whole history, 
and in view of the work which he came into the 
world to accomplish, it would seem Httle less than 
impiety, to conclude, as some have done, that he 
kept in constant exercise a miraculous power to save 
himself from feeling the full weight of human temp- 
tation. At least, the burden of proof must fall on 
those who adopt this notion. To our mind, no pro- 
position seems more obvious, than that the full dig- 
nity and sublimity of our Saviour's character is de- 
veloped only by considering him, in his state of hu- 
miUation, as a man — '< not of the common and ordi- 
dinary class, but one of those great and extraordinary 
persons of whom the world has seen but few ;" — yet 
struggling, as indeed he did struggle, with all the evils 
which fall to the lot of the lowest of the sons of men ; 
in the mean time sustained, not by miraculous power, 
but by the resignation and the faith expressed at the 
close of his memorable conflict in Gethsemane, — 
^('Uot as I willy hut as thou wilt,'^^ Contenaplated in 
this light only, can wejiel that he was '^an example 
for us, that we should follow his steps, "^^^ 



* It is not claimed that there is a perfect unanimity in the 
views of theological writers, concerning the point we have last 
touched. The conclusion which we have presented, however, 
follows legitimately from the principles laid doAvn by Profes- 



156 CONCLUSION. 



CONCLUSION. 

We have now gone through this subject, as we 
proposed to ourselves ; introducing nothing but what 
appeared essential to our plan, and avoiding nothing, 
on account of the difficulty it presented. Aside from 
our inability to do full justice to so grand a theme, 
we have little to regret, except the necessity we have 
found ourselves under, on account of the narrow limits 
which we have prescribed to ourselves, of sometimes 
making simple references, when quotations would 

sors Ullmann, B. B. Edwards, and Stuart, even in the quota- 
tions we have made. The doctrine is more distinctly stated 
by Farmer ; and is taught by Whitby, Wesley, Henry, Dod- 
dridge, Scott, and others, in their comments on the tempta- 
tions of Christ. It is recognised by Fletcher, when he says of 
Satan, in his essay on Christian Perfection, — " See him trans- 
forming himself into an angel of light on the pinnacle of the 
temple," and by Norris, (^Hist, of Jesus Christ, Serm. iv,) when 
he speaks of our Saviour's " subjecting himself to the same 
temptation, and opposing himself to the same danger as Adam 
had done,"and of the " snares covertly spread by Satan for our 
Lord." — The general doctrine, that Christ by his incarnation 
assumed the whole of human nature, ** encumbered with all 
the consequences of sinfulness," yet without sin, so that he 
might, " from his own experience, become acquainted with all 
the weaknesses, sufierings, temptations, and conflicts of those 
for whom he was to intercede," is also presented by Tholuck, 
(comment on Romans viii, 3,) and by Neander, {Hist, of the 
First Planting of the Christian Church, Book vi. Chap, ii.) Knapp 
says, on this subject : — " The Scripture doctrine is this : ♦ the 
glory which Christ, in his superior nature, had with the Fa- 
ther from eternity, was imparted to his human nature, and 



CONCLUSION. 157 

have been so much more satisfactory to a certain 
class of our readers. Even this, however, we shall 
not regret, if it shall have any tendency to call atten- 
tion to the works referred to — some of them masterly 
productions, such as every man who would " show 
himself approved unto God, a workman that needeth 
not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of 
truth," should be acquainted with. 

Among the most obvious conclusions to be deduced 
from the entire discussion, as we have presented it, 
dire,— Jirst^ that there is doubtless a higher state of 

shared with it when he became a man, so far as his human 
nature was susceptible of this glory; and was manifested 
whenever and wherever it was necessary upon earth,^ John xvii, 5, 
22, 24; Chap, xiv, coll. Phil, ii, 9—11."— " In the state of 
humiliation, the divine in Christ supported his humanity, 
wherever and whenever there was any necessity for it ; espe- 
cially whenever his Messianic offices required. The Divine 
nature, however, did not impart to the human any attributes 
of which the latter, especially in its earthly state and condi- 
tion, was incapable, or of which it did not stand in need." 
(Christ. Theology, Sec. ci.) Professors Storr and Flatt teach 
this same doctrine, with a distinct statement of " the reason 
why Jesus did not obtain an exalted dignity immediately after 
his union with the Divine nature ;" and this reason is found 
" in the work which he was destined to accomplish on earth." 
— " As it was necessary for the welfare of the human family 
that Jesus should live upon earth as a man perfectly like our- 
selves, sin only excepted, that he should experience the afflic- 
tions of every kind to which man is subject, and even sub- 
mit to a death of the most cruel nature ; so also it was the 
will of God that his Son should be placed in such a situation — 
that is, the higher nature with which the man Jesus was most 

14 



158 CONCLUSION. 

Christian attainment to be made in this life, than 
most Christians seem to have any notion of; second^ 
that the precise point of practicable attainment has 
not been fixed with sufficient definiteness by those 
who have written on the subject ; third, that the 
writers who defend the doctrine of Christian i:)erfec- 
tion have, so far as we have seen, furnished very 
slight occasion, to say the least, for the charges of 
<< fanaticism," "spiritual pride," <' self-confidence," 
"narrow-spiritedness," and '^want of charity," some- 
times brought against them by their opponents ; or for 
any attempt to fasten on any of their systems the epithet 
'' Perfectionism," or any other offensive or odious ap- 

closely united, did not exert as great an influence on this man 
as it might have done, and as it afterwards really did. For 
example, his Divine nature did not exert its power to elevate 
and extend the human knowledge of Jesus, (who was destined 
to pass through the state of childhood like other persons,) to 
a degree which would not have comported with his childhood, 
or generally with the state in this world for which God had 
designed him. The Divine nature [subsequently, also,] for- 
bore to exert any influence, by which the situation of Jesus 
would have been rendered more splendid than it was intended 
to be during that particular time." (Fiblical Theology, §§ Ixxix, 
Ixxx.) See, also, Christian Spectator, Vol. v, No. ii, June, 1833. 
It is the part of timid or ignorant theologians, through the 
fear of detracting from the divinity of our Saviour, either to 
deny that he was a man ; or, admitting this, to deny that the 
Divine nature in him forbore its exercise, except so far only 
as was necessary to the work which he was destined to ac- 
complish on earth. — Was it necessary to this work, that he 
should be in the constant exercise of any of the attributes 
of Divinity 1 



CONCLUSION. 159 

pellation ; fourth^ that nearly all the different views 
which are entertained concerning Christian perfec- 
tion, so far as they are essential to the thing itself, 
may easily be reconciled, by the exercise of such a 
spirit of forbearance and concession, as ought always 
to characterize the search after religious truth — many 
of them arising merely from different modes of ex- 
plaining the same admitted principles ; 2ind fifths that 
the laying aside, as far as practicable, of the conven- 
tional terms and phrases of the various sects, on the 
part of all who engage in the discussion of such 
topics, would greatly contribute to a mutual under- 
standing of each other. If what we have written 
shall tend in any degree to throw light upon this 
important Christian doctrine ; in the same degree 
shall we have promoted the best interests of man, 
and thus have accomplished one of the objects 
for which we undertook the investigation of this 
great subject. The other leading object was — the 
hope of deriving personal benefit from the examination 
necessary to settle the practical questions involved in 
this investigation. That the reader who has accom- 
panied us through this little volume has found as 
much pleasure in perusing it, as the writer in prepar- 
ing it — is perhaps more than we have a right to ex- 
pect. We part, however, with the prayer of the 
WTiter, that we may meet again, where truth shall 
no longer be seen, as through a glass, darkly ; nor 
error ever more constitute any part of our fancied 
knowledge. 

THE END. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 1 606g 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



esr 

7^^ 



